neamtzu_rau wrote:
And if everything else went wrong, a B83 landing on Caesar's palace ought to end all problems. Hell, it wouldn't even have to be a nuke, and there is no way that the romans would notice the plane, you can't stop what you can't see, and if they somehow miraculously notice the bomb as it comes down through their well-known god-mod power, what are they going to do? Shoot it? Blow it up? If you are within range of it, you are within the explosion radius, and if it is a nuke, you get to pick whether to be incinerated on the spot, or be cooked from the inside.
edit: And I seriously doubt that someone who can't spell needed did serious research. Especially because if he did, he would know that flaming arrows were actually very rarely used, because 1) it messes up the course of the arrow, and 2) You are bringing a flame up to your bow. Your wooden bow. Your flammable wooden bow.
Technology wins. We simply have advantages the Romans could never dream of. If we really wanted to commit the genocide of the entire Roman Empire, we could stomp it flat in a massive air raid; destroy the camps, marching armies, politicians... the list goes on. There's nothing they can do against a plane, and little to nothing against a helicopter.
I don't think there really is much more to be said that Nodaisho hasn't already covered... That is, until someone plays devil's advocate.
The army has helicopters & A10's for a lot of good reasons,
and one of the really good ones it telling divarty what gridsquares need to be erased by the 155mm guns several miles away.
While cavalry charge sounds like a good idea against the artilery, that is because those cavalry havent heard of CanisterFlechette muntitions that wipe out entire horsetroops per shot. Any that survive can find out the firebase has Overwatch infantry support the hard way. 2000 horse can become a memory, never even getting close to the 155mm battery & 8 BMG humvees .
Sure, if some guy want to have the tanks be dumb, they can lose. Or if you say there is just not enough bullets to kill every Roman. Or if we left the heli's at home. But Joe Stallin had a saying about modern combat: Artillery is the god of war. Roman seige engines had neither the range nor maneuver to compete with 25mmBushmaster AFVs less 120mmMBTs, and their cavalry didnt have firepower or maneuver on the Hummers. Even Brit Longbowmen fall way short vs m16/SAW. Advancing infantry assuming their tower sheild wall will stop a 50BMG or even a m60 will get mowed like the lawn way before they can even think about chucking their pilum.
Or of course they can lose if Caesar has enough Legionnaires and we're talking about a game of Civilization II or III :D.
True, true, but they were like 20 nationalities livin' in the Roman Empire at the time and I doubt that fifty thousand men can whitstand the share weight of 20 billion of sarmatians,parthians,iranians,jews,galls,germans,britans,cartaginians,nubians, egiptians,greeks.
Get your facts right. Again. Please , try answering my "refuel" question once in a whille...
Face it, when you ran outta bullets, the Sarmathians, Galic tribes, Germans, Chartaginians , Thracians, Dacians, Huns ,Egyptians and yes, Romans will have a field-day.
Your average M-16 holds 20- or 30-rounds. It's range (550 m) allows it to be quite deadly. Lett's say you slaughter millions of archers, spearmen,cavalry. If all the nations unite against you, that's IT ! END GAME !
Basically, as soon as you atack and defeat a roman army, more armies will come over your positions and no matter how well defended, how heavyly armoured , how well supllyed you are, you will eventually run OUT of bullets.
Kill thousands, it's okay, but were will you get other M-16 mags ? From the smith?
And remember, as soon as u start killing, it would be even harder for you to survive that time-line, because, basically you'll be at war with the whole world. Remember, those "2-3 clips of ammunition for their rifle" it's ALL you've got ! After that, it's your time to perish.
I doubt that romans will look at you as gods, or be scared of your riffles. They were very resiliant and always fought untill the bitter end of a campaign. As soon as one people advance on their lands, chalenging them, they would gather forces and eventually defeat them.
You will loose men . Plague, if not from poison, because the locals will soon poison all wells and waterlines, so what then ? And each time you fight a battle, you loose a litlle more. Your men will eventually feel this is hopelles.
So what do you do then ?
When you run outta ammo ? And fuel ? Your jets are grounded, your tanks are imobile, every single cannon is now just a piece of junk. Did you think of this outcome ?
Or do you suposse you'll reach Rome in no time and overpower the Emperor. Even so, there's the rest of the barbarians to think about. My advice is : save your bullets. You can't gun down everyone ! This isn't a John Wayne movie...
And this.
It's a lot easier to kill a bunch of people when they've so kindly bundled themselves in waterborne wooden boxes. ^_^
Sure, they could try and metagame their way through Alaska... I'd like to see them survive that terrain.
Some might say Military Intelligence is an oxymoron, but... I would like to think we're not that stupid. I think they'd probably try and make as little an impact as possible for the reasons I've already mentioned.
If their very purpose was to eliminate the Roman Empire, they would have done their homework... An infiltration team would assassinate as many leaders as they could in the first strike, cutting the snake of at its head before sneaking out of the city. When the allies of Rome came in to aid, there would be no army to fight, as the US forces would have relocated to a very defensible and out-of-the-way location (quite possibly somewhere they can begin building means to resupply ammunition). The US armed forces will make use of assassination tactics the Romans and their allies cannot hope to counter. People die instantly, struck down as though the gods willed it...
There would be panic. Chaos is weakness... and the Roman Empire would crumble before its time, with minimal losses to the US due to using, you know, tactics.
I also keep on thinking of mortars raining down destruction from the skys. How is a roman going to interpret that? Their gods must be really ******, or these foreign gods are really powerful, time to run!
I don't see them holding at all, I see them immediately running.
Obviously this guy has no concept of the range of ancient war engines and modern firearms. you can simply plug the guy running the catapult in the head, and then what? A M240 where you can watch your tracers, you can really reach out and touch someone, not even mentioning the M82.
Yes, there is a point where the US troops would run out of ammo and gas, but it wouldn't be immediately, and the devistation they would cause prior to that would send shockwaves of such magnitude that the empire would collapse.
I think it is much more intersting to wonder how far a single company, 100 men, with their basic full combat loadout, say they were in Iraq and stepped through some time portal, how long and how much they could accomplish.
I think 100 men with M-16s set on semiauto, taking reasonably careful shots at men standing in rank and file would kill 100-200 men instantly. If a group of musket armed troops of the napoleonic era could muster enough firepower to repulse a cavlary charge, 2 guys with M-16s could do the same.
The Romans didn't have crap for archers anyways, they more relied on javelins. And modern weapons so outclass javelins it isn't even funny.
Plus the whole term 'decimation' came from the pracitce of the roman legion if it fled in battle. They drew lots and 1 in 10 was sentenced to death, the other 9 had to beat him to death. Thing is, in ancient warfare, the deathrate was pretty low, you stood a better chance of surviving by sticking in the fight than if you had to face 'decimation'
So I have to think that the rapidity of which the front rank would simply drop screaming and fountaining blood when the enemy were still basically dots (say prone at 300 yards) it would break the nerve of a man who could stand sholder to shoulder and stab at his enemy for hours.
A little omnisciency would let the Romans know each riflemen only can kill about 150 romans (assuming a healthy miss rate of a 210 ammo load). But without this insider knowlege, how exactly are the Romans going to know that if they can just keep sending another 2000 men against that same 100, that havent taken a single loss, after losing just 12,000 or 15,000 they can eventually close to Pilum/Melee range. Assuming of course the Army side just chooses to not use any 155/105 arty or 81/60mortars.
Remember the company mortars?
Advancing behind a shiled wall requires super dense formations, the artilly dream setup: 100-200 troops in each 155 HE burst.
But the underlieing concept of the Army coming to be at conflict with the Romans is weak. Intel would quickly show who they were, and language might be slow at first, but the Romans knew how to be political. The new GreenThunderGods would just be a tool of the legions to siege Romes enemy cities. Have the vehicles pulled by oxen to Gaul or the Burgs, 10 shells into a city then demand surrender. If not, 10 shells to erase city defense walls & open a gaping hole for the legions to march in. The 1/2 Hour Siege for the just the cost of feeding a 10-15k Army 'foriegner-legion' under Romes Flag to do it.
what does the century do when the sgt tells the squad to hold fire, and picks his best marksman to knock out the centurion, his second, and the standard bearer? What happens to the army when all the centuries advancing have this happen to them? Does the general ride out and see what is taking so long and to straighten stuff out? Bam no more general either. 200 rounds fired and the entire cohort is crippled.
(now you hit em with a few mortar rounds)
American Soldiers have all the training of the romans, have studied their tactics and have better training, equiment, support, medical support and etc. Even taking a few of these away any American soldier has better training than any Roman soldier. How many roman soldiers have 12 years of school?
Even if you reduced the americans down to the same weapons, their knowledge of tactics alone should give them a tremendous advantage. Firearms alone would quickly swing the advantage. The ability for one American to kill many romans at a distance is just too huge.
Of course, realistically - depending on resources - the Americans would simply mount an arial campaign to destroy the Roman military camps without losing a single soldier.
Yes, you could see Romans winning battles. And if the Romans had many times the number of troups and the Americans were short supplies, you could cobble together a scenario where the Romans win - but it's just not very likely.
Using d20 Modern rules, guns aren't significantly more effective than arrows. They can't be or it tips the system on it's head. However once you start looking at rockets, automatic weapons, bombs and etc, it's just not a contest unless Rome has some spellcasters.
Mark Charke
American Soldiers have all the training of the romans, have studied their tactics and have better training, equiment, support, medical support and etc
How about in melee - evenly matched?
How about in melee - evenly matched?
If it comes to unarmed combat, I'd expect the US soldiers to do better. Melee including swords and spears and the like? I think the standard training for that sort of combat is as follows: back away, fire more.
Ranged is a much more important strength to have than melee nowadays, to the point where carrying swords and the like into combat is hopelessly stupid. I really don't think things would even come to melee, since the US fights dirty.
I'm sure Backstabbist could tell you who said this, though I forget... and am probably not quoting word for word, but here it is regardless: "If you're fighting a fair fight, something is wrong."
it it burns they can run on it
+oil
+the "good" whine
+More oil
+surface deposits of petroleum, yes, some one will know were these exist, and they do exist in the Italy/France region
So, why would they use the butt, when they have a riffle, it will go threw his shield, the guy behind him, and the guy behind HIM, and the guy behind HIM. The roman army forms up on three ranks, It will never get to melee
And even before that: Napalm
There was a certain air devision whos sole duty was to disperse napalm. thier motto was: Only we can prevent forests.
They will Never use the tanks guns unless they come to a fort, other wise it's Road kill. Lots of it.
The .50 cal. quad mount on a half track, this thing is known as a Meat chopper, you can figure out why.
Again, though, being a better force in armed melee combat when you're fighting a force that is highly proficient with 200X-grade military firearms, not to mention other more powerful weaponry, is kind of moot.
So, why would they use the butt, when they have a riffle, it will go threw his shield, the guy behind him, and the guy behind HIM, and the guy behind HIM. The roman army forms up on three ranks, It will never get to melee
Scroll up. We are discussing how they'd do in melee (as in : armed melee).
@ all:
I think the average G.I. 'll probably be superior in terms of unarmed combat.
Hmm... now if the US soldiers had some way of reliably disarming the Roman soldiers in melee... :P
Thought: they are taught to disarm people holding guns and knives. It'll be harder, but couldn't that transfer into disarming people who are holding gladius?
Its what they do.
Its their infantry thing... they do it & they do it good.
Step 1- Huck a pilum generally towards the enemy lines to Unshield them.
Step 2- Get midevil on their now shieldless azz, up close & personal.
That is their main thing, melee infantry with a mean lil stabber you slash folks with while lining up a killshot, not a finesse rapier.
Just because they are so centered on melee, I would supose the romans would be more strength oriented than fit/stamina oriented physically... giving them the edge in all melee. But like was said before, how many of them know the square root of IL = VII
The tactics of the legions is not skirmishing, but ranks. That will fail against the ranged skirmish & bombardment tactics of modern warfare.
This ROME talk has got me interested in cueing up some Titus Pulo stabby action.... fun stuff.
The roman fanboy seems to be unclear on whether you are fighting the romans or the whole world, rome wasn't exactly considered to be a benefactor, if word got out that the gods destroyed Caesar's palace, I think you would be getting a lot of revolts.
He keeps talking about running out of fuel and ammunition, I say that by the time that happens, they are in rome, having cut a burning swath through anything that opposed them, and looted all flammable objects to keep the fuel reserves up in case more action is necessary. And the romans wouldn't know that you could run out of ammunition with the guns, they wouldn't connect them with bows, they would think of it all as magic. Sufficiently advanced technology and whatnot.
edit: Oh, and I am pretty sure the fair fight quote comes from Clint Smith, though it also seems like something Jeff Cooper might have said.
I drove a m35 Deuce with a multifuel injector pump. Oil, gas, deisel, meth/ethahol, vegi-oil, burbon, honey... just mix a coctail in the tank with some kind of lubrication and it will squirt it into the 1100degree cylinders to make black smoke out of it.
Back then, our few 'new' 900's didnt have multifuel injector pumps. I dont know what will become of vehicles that are particular to kero-type fuels.
But I do know the 8 oxen teams will transport the column to battles where they will fire up their turbines & diesels to get outlandishly killy on the local mooks from waaayyy far away.
As for BlackPowder Conversion of the m16-
We talked about this before, and the only real option for reliability is to disable the gas system & use it as a T-handle repeater. The fouling would most likely clobber reliability in a magazine or two. However, one could load a Smokeless magazine for auto/semi work, then switch mags & kill the gastube for Reapeater fire the rest og the battle. One might be able to stretch their Smokeless Auto magazine with a 3:1 mix of blackpodwer loads (if one could workout a grind/load that would cycle depite fouling)
Interesting note is the 25mm Bradleys, 20mm/7.62mm rotarys, 20&30 helicopter chainguns... all the chainguns & chainspooled guns will fire at 100% ROF with BlackPowder Conversion
I'm not stating that it necessarily will, but if it did - fists and combat knives versus swords, shields, spears, etc...how would it turn out?
I am thinking this through.
For starters, the roman infantrymen, like most men of the period, would be about the size of the vietcong. Heck, even Abe Lincoln, considered EXTREMELY tall, yet 6foot 4 isn't all that tall now. General Custer was an average man for his day, and was 5ft 5 or so. We just have so much better nutrition and access to calcium, vitamins, iodine in the salt, etc.
Second, roman infantrymen weren't trained to fight. They were trained to stand together in close rank and stab forward. Most of their training was not to improve fighting technique on the individual level, but march, wheel, retreat, and advance as a single entity. This was very potent.
However, as others have pointed out, the US army studies the history of battle. They know weapons progression, they realize what technological advancements spelled the end of the legion. I have no doubt that our troops could make the equivalent of pikes, form ranks 3 deep, and repell a roman charge. There is a reason the exact mix of roman weapons was dropped, yet the technique of training the men to act as a single unit, be it pikes, muskets, or whatever, was maintained for so long.
Now the only problem is 100 vs however many romans. Eventually weight of numbers would bear down even the most skilled, unless again the USA relies on it's knowledge of military history and finds narrow passes in which to defend themselves...but I think it more likely that he USA would fall back to different lessons learned, and would adopt a form of guerilla warfare. They would be much more adept at very small units working in concert even when seperated by a good 10 yards. they would be much more adept at cameoflage, making guille suits, etc etc. They know the basic boobie traps of dig a hole, put a feces stained sharpend stick in there and cover the top with grass. They would know to strike at the legion supply lines and not the troops themselves. They would know to set fire to the tents of the encampment, etc. their long running digital watches would allow for expert syncrinzyation of attacks and distractions. I think our troops moving light and fast (leave the guns behind, except for select individuals that still have ammo, drop the excess gear, and you have men in extremely sturdy boots, light camo uniforms, and kbars...6 foot tall men used to carrying 100 lbs of equipment, they could HAUL ASS across the plains) burning fields and disrupting roman life, freeing and arming slaves even just to distract the roman troops.
the US army would shoot them as much as they could, but they would switch tactics before totally depleting all their ammo. I don't think it would ever boil down to a melee matchup, while I believe the US soldier would be slightly better, the US soldier would also realize that they were only SLIGHTLY better, and would attempt to strike at the troops in other ways.
I think it is much more intersting to wonder how far a single company, 100 men, with their basic full combat loadout, say they were in Iraq and stepped through some time portal, how long and how much they could accomplish.
Sounds like the seed for a campaign
Anyway, this really really depends on the loadout of the US force. If it's 100 troops, without heavy weapons, then I'd say that the romans have a decent chance (not talking by attrition. yet.). Rome employed skirmish tactics too. Just not with their average legionaire. They had skilled archers. They had awesome siege engines. Th... I'm a fanboy now, right?
I don't think the US soldiers would be seen as demons or magic users at first. Not at the relatively long range of combat.
On the other hand, following the rules of engagement, wouldn't the US forces have to wait untill fired upon? That means that they'd have to wait untill the legionaires had thrown their pilums (assuming no giant flaming rocks or whatever). That makes stuff more interesting, doesn' it?
And why wouldn't the Roman's see the US soldiers as demons or magic users when their men begin dropping before they can see the enemy, and keep dropping while they fruitlessly search for the source of the attack?
They might not see the soldiers as such, considering they won't be able to see them at all, but if they ever made the connection...
I might be wrong though.
Just my thoughts.
Also, I wouldn't call you a fanboy, Tema; you argue logically.
but they were thrifty too.
They would recognize the costs of a campaign, real & resource commitment, and were open minded negotiate terms. Taxing people is better than killing them, so let the GreenThunder legion join the empire to work & pay unto Ceaser that which is Ceasers. The US has bases in all kinds of forign countries, whynot there too.
If you thought the Romans were big on building roads, wait till we sell them Steam Railroad technology. Aquaducts are nice, but look how well Plumbing works. The GreenThunder Legion would live well off granted lands from the technology they sell to the Empire.
Lodestone Generators/Altenators
Electric Lights
HeatPump Refridgeration
We have so much low tech to sell theory of, why would they fight us.
Regardless of whether or not they saw it as magic or higher technology, I think seeing your comrades drop so quickly from an unknown cause employed by an unknown enemy would damage morale
Oh yeah! Bigtime.
When the enemy has machines that kill you 200x better than you can kill them, does it really mater if you knew if it was magic or not?
Stabbist's right, the romans'd probably try other things that fight the troops.
And thanks Master Vega. I was just affraid of being too "ooh, romans are SO cool! and they have big shields n'stuff." ... ;D
"An individual living in a Stone Age society is primitive, but he isn't necessarily gullible, stupid or easily frightened by advanced technology"
@ Akodo: Well. The scandinavians (and probably many of the other 'barbarian' races - saxons, etc.) of the time were pretty large too. The romans didn't see them as demons. Just as barbarians. They aknowledged them as skilled warriors.
I don't think the romans ever messed much with the scandinavians. The northern Gauls and Celts and all that, yes. Of course they didn't have camo to make them disappear or magically able to talk to eachother over far distances or boomsicks of death. But you are right, they did aknowledge that type as skilled warriors, but they knew that such individual skill was useless as formation fighting trumped it.
They had skilled archers. They had awesome siege engines. Th... I'm a fanboy now, right?
I won't go so far as to call you a fanboy, but the roman archers were not very adept at all. Slingers and even properly thrown javelins were a match for the bows the romans had their auxillia using. The greeks had this same problem too. This is both cause and effect. Poor bowmaking technique drove them to develope infantry skills instead. A drive for infantry skills instead caused them to not bother developing improved bows, even on the few occasins when they assimilated a culture that did have better bows. They had decent seige weapons...for knocking down mud brick walls. Their seige weapons would have been useless against a good medivel stone castle. And unlike movies, seige weapons weren't really used as anti infantry weapons in the feilds. A few were, but not many were designed with this purpose in mind. They were generally short ranged and designed to be used against a standard large block of infantry stationary just outside of bow/sling/javelin range.
I don't think the US soldiers would be seen as demons or magic users at first. Not at the relatively long range of combat.
really? how do you think the romans would describe being hit by 500 yard rifle fire, when the prone enemy wasn't even visible or even 200 yard rifle fire when the enemy was an unassuming speck laying down. Would they even associate a man laying down as a man engaged in using a weapon?
Besides, history has answered this angle of the question time and time again. Guns were seen by primitive people to be more than just weapons. Either the wielders were gods, or the weapon itself was some sort of demon to be sated. This is where the term 'cannon fodder' first came from, that the demons that were guns had huge appetites for human destruction, but evenually they could be sated. So you fed them the least important troops first.
On the other hand, following the rules of engagement, wouldn't the US forces have to wait untill fired upon? That means that they'd have to wait untill the legionaires had thrown their pilums (assuming no giant flaming rocks or whatever). That makes stuff more interesting, doesn' it?
Not really. What is often forgotten is that thrown projectiles are slow, very slow. Now, if you are packed information, there is nothing you can do but take it, but one of the benifits of skirmishers were that they were spread out enough that a volley of projectiles weren't very effective (remember you aren't targeting individuals, you are flinging it high to get max range and have it fall on the group) and skirmishers could move right, left, forward, and back to avoid them, or simply the whole group of skirmishers could turn and run back about 10-20 yards when they saw the legion throw. This is why the Romans didn't send their legion after skirmishers, they sent skirmishers after skirmishers. This is why skirmishers are used, make the romans throw their small supply of pilums.
So, 90 soldiers stay back, prone and hidden, 10 go forward a bit, pilums are thrown, the 10 scurry back and the 90 unleash hell like the romans could only imagine.
Actually, it's from d20 Future, concerning PL: 0 Stone Age:
"An individual living in a Stone Age society is primitive, but he isn't necessarily gullible, stupid or easily frightened by advanced technology"
this is absolutely true. Often stone age people are extremely inquisitive of new technology. I think they wanted to make it clear that stone age people wouldn't run screaming from a flashlight, radio, or similar item.
Once a technologically advanced weapon was used as a weapon, then it is time for the running and screaming.
This counts for everyone, not just 'dumb primitives' If you don't also have a technologically advanced weapon, running and screaming is a good idea. Even a crowd of advanced people aren't going to mill around when the oppressive regime in charge okays the paramilitary forces to start shooting to disrupt the protest, they are going to run with fear, well educated fear.
The knowledge aspect is important, in a big enough force, someone is going to know how to make gunpowder (look in the demo specialists first), someone will know how to make steel, for longer knives or swords if needed, and for some armor, if needed, though I think making blackpowder guns would be more likely. Melt down lead and you have bullets just as soon as you make a mold for them, train the men to operate the guns fast, maybe rig up something so that they just pump on the foregrip and cycle the action, if you can, since blackpowder won't get the same speed, which means no fragmentation, just a slightly longer .22 subsonic. They would expand like exposed lead bullets have a tendency to do, pity those 1st century romans didn't sign the Hague treaty in the 1800s, or the troops wouldn't be allowed to use those. What would the accuracy be on a blackpowder .223? Wouldn't be able to outrange the archers so well, so hit them while you don't know where they are, directly after you hit the siege engine operators. Or, possibly, you would be able to make smokeless powder, nitrocellulose with nitroglycerin for the two-stage powder, right? Keep a bag over the ejection port of your guns, though, you could forge new brass, but it would be easier to not have to. What about new primers? Would those be makeable?
If they do start making swords, if they can make modern steel, they can collect some roman armor and swords and show just how much weaker the roman weaponry is than theirs.
Course, all these ideas could royally screw the timeline, so the main thing the army would want to do is get back home before anyone figures out how they make everything. If they were lucky, all of the knowledge would be considered heretical and would be destroyed at some point.
Guerilla war would be very effective, sure, the 300 at Thermopylae were able to survive until they were outflanked, but that would not be as effective as hit and runs throughout the country, striking out of nowhere, traps around every corner, shots from nowhere, making themselves seem larger than they were, because as you said, men used to carrying a hundred pounds of equipment, stripped down to just 20 or so, end up moving pretty fast.
I am speaking in general terms here, no need to : "it is actually 498 years and 2 months later, not 500 years!".
So the Bronze Age is actually somewhat earlier than the Roman anything.
I believe it was something to the effect of "What if a Carrier Battle Group was transported back in time to the Persian Gulf Area and How would they survive with no retrieval means to speak of ?"
I remember one of the FIRST things that was mentioned was Resupply of Vehicles. The carrier shops had various pieces of equipment or tools to filter the necessary petroleum products found but vehicle travel was severely limited to emergency only. Backstabbists Ox Cart idea sounded familiar.
In the Persian Gulf area there was an ample amount of resources to get to and little in the way of resistance. Possibly the same could be said of the lawless areas of the Roman Kingdom or Republic but not the Empire. A good deal of "tooling down" would be needed to maintain a working society.
SM Stirling's Islander Trilogy covers ALOT of this concept. Spoiler note: It doesn't turn out good for the combative peoples the agress the "Eagle People" or as Backstabbist calls them, Green Thunder Gods.
It would be an interesting sight to see three or four Black Powder rotary guns (Gatlin Variety) side by side on a flatbed cart pulled by a team of oxen with ammo carts parked to the rear of them. Imagine the masses of Roman Legionaires that died with a confused look on their faces.
There's not enough criteria from the Roman Fanboy to hazard a good guess. Not enough where, when, why, how much, and what is the "prize" to consider. And gamewise? Needs more story or, as Dad would say, "What happens when the make-up comes off?"
Still be an awesome game though.
Doug
but I tried to downplay the magic/divine aspect of the Green Thunder Legion. The Romans have seen their own siege technology baffle the northern mooks, so I doubt their deep thinkers would be viewing our machines as magic/godly for long. Since we havent really established just how many foks we are talking about, I attribed Legion to the Green Thunder people.
Dr Gattlin actually pattened a Cap&Ball version of his famous gun. The design had loaded seteel chambers that came into place behind the barrels, then the shot steel chambers would drop from the gun. Who knew he saw what S&W saw but did it with steel rather than brass.
(but, I also agree with the people that wonder why the two sides would just start fighting)
It's purely hypothetical - make up any reason you want.
It's purely hypothetical - make up any reason you want.
obviously, when the Americans arrived, their house fell on a roman with expensive shoes.
There's not enough criteria from the Roman Fanboy to hazard a good guess.
If you want, you can follow the link and read the topic in full: I didn't feel like quoting all of it.
obviously, when the Americans arrived, their house fell on a roman with expensive shoes.
What?
We've had a house this whole time?
Why wasnt that listed among our assests?
What's in this house... I'm thinking if we just pop in "The 300" in the DVD and give it to the Romans as a "oops, sorry" gift... we can put this whole house dropping thing behind us.
Your thumb was on the NSN #.
his kill rate is 110 to 7, yea, for every seven men he lost, they took one hundred and eleven men with them.
this is against heavy fortifications.
so at that rate 1571 romans die before Macarthur, probably more.
as I said before, you don't wast ammo on troops out of formation, you just run them over, or let them flee.
use "over penetration to your advantage" would be the title of the first briefing after the time slip.
If the ind blew a cloud of virus across the battlefield, the low med tech mooks without vaccines would suffer horrendously more than the high med tech guys without vaccines. The Romans couldnt even MOPP up, they breathed whatever blew their way.
I think "run rampant" is only applicable to a few breif periods of time when a large amount of people had it. And of course, this did severly crimp roman imperial military activity, but in general it was a very low level disease with a few people occasionally having it...no different than the colonial USA before the vaccinations were commonplace.
Further, the US forces, being decended for the most part from ethnicities of people who had for thousands of years lived with smallpox would be roughly average as far as surviability. Heck, many people of European decent are still carrying a genetic immunity to Bubonic Plague. Yes, the Roman Army would probably have 10% of it's individuals who had low level exposure preiviously in life already, and would have the antibodies, but smallpox was NEVER like chickenpox, where most people eventually had it. I don' think that 10% would make one bit of a difference. Remember, there were many instances of smallpox hitting ancient civilizations (sometimes repeatedly) and taking out huge swaths of the population.
Both groups vulnerabiliy to smallpox would be extremely high. On a scale of from 1-10, the US troops would probably be at 8 while the Romans were at 7
Further, I expect the US troops to be in much better general health. Also, with an idea of how the disease spread, they would be much better able to quickly isolate and contain the disease if it did hit the group, and better know to avoid contact with the sick.
Finally, as a populaion, the US military would be composed of adults between the ages of 17-30, there would be no elderly, sickly adults, or young children, those are the ones normally taken by smallpox, AND the are also the ones most likely to be acting as carriers becuase of taking longer to fight it off,
Unless the Romans specifically started sending people sick with smallpox into the US camps, I don't think it would have mattered much, and we have zero evidence that the romans knew enough about the disease to attempt to spread it.
That is true, as I recall, you still have to be clean-shaven so you can use your gas masks, so I would guess they are still issuing them. I would think a gas mask would keep small pox out of your air.
or at least that is what they tell the military. Clean shaven vs beard might make a small percentage difference, but in Israel, pretty much everyone has a gasmask in case of attack, including the heavily bearded people.
I think you have an odd view of how smallpox would work in the roman empire.
Point conceeded.
To be honest, it seems a kinda silly set up anyway. A handful of SAWs alone would route a legion of densely packed legionaires. Also, the 101st Airborne are not marines.
To be honest, it seems a kinda silly set up anyway.
Most hypothetical situations tend to be. Anyways, I wonder if the poster meant the ENTIRE military, or just parts of it.
Yeah, the whole military would rout them, cut off the head of the snake, the bombers hit rome in the middle of night, Nero won't be born in time to play his harp as rome burns. So, they should probably hit it during the day, you are making a huge shockwave in the temporal stream anyway, might as well try to avoid killing more people than you have to, one of them might be your ancestor.
Day or night doesn't make much difference to our bombers nowadays.
I figured the only way this would ever happen (and make any sense) is if the US military hopped dimensions into another time-line... That'd be an interesting setting, actually. Think about it: our world is lost, so we need to make the best of another time-line and hope we can advance far enough to eliminate whatever threat is routing us in the future. You could get two or three critical campaigns out of it, actually: routing Rome, (possibly) advancing the world, and fighting off whatever drove the US soldiers off in the first place.
That said, one would think that we'd try and unite the world... but then War is a catalyst for technological advancement...
Ragitsu -- I hope you don't mind me making a spin-off thread from this. I'll try and have it up by tomorrow, if not later tonight.
That's what the U.S. military would be to the Romans.
Conquistadores shows up with something like 400 soldiers and topples the entire Aztec empire. The disparity between gun toting imperialists versus stone age society is roughly equavalent to a modern army versus an iron age one.
It wasn't the tech that won, it was the deals.
The Conquistadores made deals with all the native tribes that hated the Aztecs so when the fight happened it wasn't 400 Conquistadores versus 100,000 Aztecs; it was 400 Conquistadores and their 100,000 allies versus 100,000 Aztecs.
In addition:
An example of a modern army versus an iron age society was during WWII when the Italians went after Ethiopia. Guns versus swords. By the time the Italians had to withdraw they still hadn't conquered the place.
Only citing two easy examples of vastly different technological cultures fighting each other.
Like anything in war, the tech helps, but the strategy is what wins or loses it for you.
Drop modern U.S. military forces into Roman times and given the history of American war fighting the Commander in charge would start cutting deals and making alliances with local tribes as soon as his feet hit the ground. I suspect he would find easy converts as most of the conquered peoples stayed in line purely because they had no hope left, drop in just a mechanized brigade that wanted to be on their side and long seated anti-Roman resentment would come out in a heartbeat.
By the time they have to fight the Romans the Americans will be able to field a large enough force of local anti-Roman tribes that the fight would look just like when the Conquistadores toppled the Aztecs.
Then again if the Commander was a douchebag he'd try and go it alone and it would look like the Italians in Ethiopia.
And as a side-note, historians estimate the largest total population the Roman Empire ever saw was between 50-100 million. The Roman army complete with auxilliaries (read allied tribal forces) was at best around 100,000 men in strength. And individual generals who thought they had a shot at becoming Emperor would easily rebel and initiate civil wars to try and seize the throne.
The Roman Empire despite popular conception was never a wholly unified or united Empire.
On day 2 of the contest you declare the romans losers as you drive tanks across our bridge. If they dont give up, we can wait for them to finish their bridge and then issue a Bridge Destroying contest. 4 or 5 direct-fire shells from a 155howitzer should do the trick to wipe out any roman bridge.
The Conquistadores made deals with all the native tribes that hated the Aztecs so when the fight happened it wasn't 400 Conquistadores versus 100,000 Aztecs; it was 400 Conquistadores and their 100,000 allies versus 100,000 Aztecs.
In addition:
An example of a modern army versus an iron age society was during WWII when the Italians went after Ethiopia. Guns versus swords. By the time the Italians had to withdraw they still hadn't conquered the place.
You are right that the firearms didn't really play a big role in the conquestidors success. They actually only had a few of them. They were very impressive noise-sticks though...that sometimes could kill. However, I am going to disagree with your assessment. They won because the locals assumed the were gods due to horses and the year of arrival. Playing this up, they were able to arrange a meeting with the nobles and seize them thwarting early resistance, and later did the same thing to monetezuma himself. Sure, the allies helped, but they really only had about 3000 locals dedicated their cause, it was enough to strengthen their actions but would not have been enough to overthrow the aztec empire if godhood and cleverness/treachery wasn't there opening doors for them
and the Italians weren't ever great soldiers during the gunpowder era, you can't really rely on them to prove a point. Especially when it is fairly easily countered with all the other examples of colonialism the french and british managed in africa with the help of the martini-henry, gatling type guns and early machineguns.
Now, the Zulu vs a Roman Legion, that would be interesting. Both groups are going to try and soften the other with thrown missles, both groups specialize in a big shield as the main armor, and a short stabbing blade as the main weapon. On one side you have pilum which peices shield, then bends making sheild nearly unusable, on the other side you have zulu using mind altering drugs and painblockers.
Now, the Zulu vs a Roman Legion, that would be interesting. Both groups are going to try and soften the other with thrown missles, both groups specialize in a big shield as the main armor, and a short stabbing blade as the main weapon. On one side you have pilum which peices shield, then bends making sheild nearly unusable, on the other side you have zulu using mind altering drugs and painblockers.
Thats an interesting point.
Here's a twist:
The Roman and the Carthaginians put aside their squabble and work out a deal to get rid of the Eagle people newcomers. The Carthaginians arrange for mass quantities of combat drugs for the Romans and metal weapons for the Zulus and continue to be one of the best navies around by transporting said integrated force to whatever front necessary.
Both the Romans and the Carthaginians were accomplished in the field of logistics. Both the Carthaginians and Zulus were accomplished in modes of transportation. The Carthaginians could work out some phenomenal alliances and had much of the near middle east to pick from. We've already established that the Romans and Zulus were great up close fighters.
Lots of action so get out the popcorn,
Doug
When did we come up with that? If we are wondering if 100 guys can fight the roman military, the answer is no. Nowhere near enough ammo to engage an entire empire can be carried by 100 guys. Including some vehicles, you cant count on more than a 200:1 kill ratio, and that just wont cut it.
I was talking about a 12B company building & throwing a Double Bailey across a 100' span for a few battalions or brigade level of deployment.
Anyone else consider just how impressive the 155 SP arty would be as Coastal Defense against ships that already have a hard time on the high seas? Between airbursts clearing the decks, and even the near misses of HE contact fused would cave in the hulls.
Lets take it up a notch. MLRS !!! I can't remember if the submunitions airburst or not but they too would be good for sweeping clear the decks of the unfortunate vessels caught underneath them.
100 man 12B unit? Spears and arrows not withstanding (or paradoxes or officer bureaucracy), they would delight in creating ALL SORTS (tm) of lethal goodness. I haven't met a 12B yet that was 100% right in the head (same for Arty or Psyop guys. Hmmm...) that didn't appreciate some mechanical mayhem device.
Now I'm curious as to what Master Vega is putting together as a spin off of this. Might even illuminate to the rest of the world why we should fear Hannibal.
Doug
I'll hopefully post it later today... if I can think about it.
My spin-off idea is to create a setting where the US, as a contingency plan, sent a large number of military personnel (and probably a good portion of non-military personnel as well) across to a parallel time-line, and back far enough that a difference could be made.
The thread is going to start with the immediate setting, during the time of the Roman Empire, and then it would hopefully progress into the construction of an altered time-line depending on what people agree the US personnel would do.
I'll hopefully be able to explain it more clearly when I post the thread. :P
When did we come up with that? If we are wondering if 100 guys can fight the roman military, the answer is no. Nowhere near enough ammo to engage an entire empire can be carried by 100 guys. Including some vehicles, you cant count on more than a 200:1 kill ratio, and that just wont cut it.
we did discuss 100 infantry vs 1 legion a while back, the general consensus was #1 firing at the leaders and eliminating them would be cake. #2 firing at the legion as it advanced in ranks would break their moral quite quickly, causing them to flee the "Green Thunder Gods" #3 some suggested the Romans would sustain 80% casualty rate, then the US troops would be out of ammo, and the superior legion close combat skill would allow them to win. (I say when you run out of ammo, you throw a few grenades at the remainder)
Note, I think the commanders would figure out the ammo issue quite quickly, elimiate leaders, and deploy a type of geurilla warfare made possible by camo, great communications, 300 meter range to kill a standing man. Company of 100 grunts moving in front of a multi-legion could demoralize it, behead it, and starve it quite easily.
However, note, A legion was often 4,200 infantry 300 horse. That is 45 kills per infantry, a mag and a half, wait until you see the whites of their eyes. That doesn't even count grenades, the company mortars, etc
Lets see, US Army Comany is really more than the targeted '100', probably closer to 150 infantry or so
US Army company= 3 rifle platoons, 1 heavy weapons platoon
Heavy Weapons platoon = 3 60mm mortars (3 man team each?), 6 MG (M240 in 7.62NATO, maybe a Ma Duce) each manned by 2 guys, 12 Anti-tank rocket totting grunts.
rifle platoon is 3 rifle squads plus 1 weapons squad which is:
Lt
3 staff sgts
6 fireteam leaders w M-16s
6 rifle/radiomen w M-16s
6 rifle/grenadiers w M-16 and underslung grenade launcher
6 SAW light machine gunners
2 Medium Machine gunners (M240, 7.62 NATO)
2 assistants to MMGs with M-16s
2 Anti-tank troopers with rockets
2 assistant AT troopers with M-16s
Just the 60mm mortars would probably be enough to break the moral of the first legion that comes up. Heck, have the 3 fire in unison, and you will probably have the emotional impact of Hiroshima. Send a messanger asking for surrender, Fire another triple, and now you have the Nagasaki level emotional impact (but here we actually have the ability to do it again, and again and again)
Expanding on that, I don't know at what point on the food chain the Apaches show up, so lets just have a single one of those sucked through too.
All you need then is "See ya guys, me and the gunner are going to go visit Rome itself, I hear the emperor wants a sky-light built into the senate"
and the Italians weren't ever great soldiers during the gunpowder era, you can't really rely on them to prove a point. Especially when it is fairly easily countered with all the other examples of colonialism the french and british managed in africa with the help of the martini-henry, gatling type guns and early machineguns.
You are exactly right, if you had read closer my point on the Italians was to describe the difference between good management/tactics (i.e. Conquistadores) vs bad management/tactics (i.e. the Italians).
The argument boils down to this, it doesn't really matter what you have, it matters what you do with it.
(give me a couple of box cutters and a ticket on a trans-continental/oceanic flight for example)
The argument that that throwing some unspecified element of the U.S. military against the ancient Roman Empire is grounds for automatic success/defeat is strange. Especially when the argument is made that the U.S. military will patently make bad decisions and only engage in a strait-up fight and that the Romans will be flawless gods of war and discipline; or visa-versa.
Here is where a good Past campaign/simulation comes in.
You are part of or leading a Battallion sent back in time to the age of Rome. Your mission is to establish a beachead for additional time-shots to establish a base of operations at this point in history. Once you arrive, every month a Battallion size contengent of men and material will arrive to bolster your possition.
Things are going swell until one month elapses and the first follow-on Battallion never materializes. You have absolutely no idea what happened. To make matters worse, your actions have come to be viewed as sedition against Rome, and your technology and beliefs as a dangerous cult to be destroyed. A Roman general at the head of his army (say 2-4 legions) is now coming for you and your local followers, they have just entered your territory. You, along with some local peoples, control an area roughly 50-miles by 50-miles.
Where did you establish your beachead and where is your base?
What equipment and technologies did you bring with you, what is left?
What decisions do you make to ensure immediate and long-term success?
When are the follow-on missions going to arrive? (if ever)
How long does your advanced technology hold out?
I'm thinking that if we want to run a simulation of "who wins" we should at least stick to d20 Modern/Past. Then, it'll be a matter of statting up U.S. soldiers of varying builds from Level 1 (the greenest of the green) to say...Level 6. Maybe up to Level 10 for the leaders?
Of course, the vehicle rules as is are greatly unbalanced (not accounting for gas mileage at all), so a proposed set of houserules for them are in order.
After that, we can set up time of day/terrain/weather/etc.
The d20 system doesn't really fit very well for realistic modeling, its mainly about a group of adventurers taking on whatever challenge the set-up puts up. But for a time-travel campaign it could be fun, especially with all the unknowns.
d20 Apocalypse seems to address the problems our intrepid U.S. military time-travelers would face once stuck in the past. Things like running out of gas, trying to distil new sources of fuel, scratch crafting gun-powder, stuff like that
According to d20 Apoc
you just scavenge "Mechanical Parts" from a grain mill or other 'machine',
and get everything you need to reload from that... just like we get the gunpowder & primers from old wrecked VW Bugs & Dishwashers "Mechanical Parts"
This is really 2 questions going on:
A) How would the combat work out?
B) How sustainable is modern warfare in ancient times?
We already know we can dumb down rifles & cannons to blackpowder repeaters, and we can make blackpowder. We know we can generate electricity and distill alcohol, that is stuff for sustainability.
But we use a ranged combat doctrine on intel & mobility, whereas the Romans make the same fatal mistake each grand battle: The command FORM RANKS. Slip Braveheart in the DVD player, and watch what the Brits do for the hourse before first blood at a battle: Line up in pretty rank block units "out of range" of the enemy, and even their archers have to wait for the enemy to "take the field" to reach the opposing ranks. That is great if both sides are using 200yd longbow, but something bad happens to the 200yd Archers when the 570m Riflemen engage that mass of bowmen.
That is of course if we dont start the battle with the generals on opposing hills overlooking the battlefield (nice tent & couch, Claudius Magnus).
Romes opening move: Depoly skirmishers to the field to probe archer strength. They have to probe, and scout their flanks a lot because the enemy only has a single unit visible.
US first move: Drop mortars on the Generals Tent way way way out of Roman Range but well within our range, and have 10 Designated Marksmen start creating a Centurian Shortage on their side (Shoot the biggest hats first, then work your way down the hat size rank scale)
If we want to say there were just 100 US troops with limited ammo,
they simply will not ever engage in a battle.
Ever.
Oldschool 13 Colonies guerilla skirmish and hide.
Also, while it would take too long to train up the modern troops to use a 200yd Longbow, it wouldnt take too long playing with a bow to learn 50yd effectiveness. Then use the new bows in our style of engagement: Ambush & Outnumber poor saps in thier camps or town occupation with 4:1 odds then run & hide
100 men wont try to beat the Roman Empire,
they would try to survive without the legions forcing a fight. Surrounding is tough, because to surround they give away their position, and we can pretty much kill any roman once we know where he is on the field.
10 Reasons why Ancient Rome would lose to a Modern American Expiditionary force:
1: The Roman army would take about 1 year to put its Imperial full might into one area. (Communication was about as fast as a runner).
2: The Romans have other enemies. Pulling soldiers away from those areas could result in invasion from the outside.
3: Romans were no fools. If they were faced with a force that was greatly superior, they would try recruit or pay off that force with gold and food.
4: Romans have no defense against Psi Ops. Just take a village and introduce the printing press....then drop leaflet propaganda all over Rome and its client states. A civil war in the Empire could easily be started. The pen IS mightier than the sword!
6: Roman infrastructure would be very vulnerable. One or two U.S. PT Boats could Sink a fleet of Roman Galleys.
7: American forces would never stand toe to toe with the Centurions. They would use theri greater mobility and tactics to wear down the enemy.
8: American soldiers are more resistant to disease because they are vaccinated against it.
9: If the Americans set about to freeing Roman slaves and offering a democratic society, they could build quite an army of followers (Think Spartacustimes 1000).
10: When winter rolls around, the Romans go home and stop fighting until the spring thaw. The Americans don't.
This really is a fun topic.
If you want to read a book along these lines, I suggest Lest Darkness Fall by L. Sprague de Camp
I really really support #3, #7, & #10
What in god's green earth, makes you people think that the U.S. would lose to the Ancient Romans?
[Quote\] Originally Posted by neamtzu_rau
1. The M1A1 Abram tanks will find themselves blocked, yes, blocked by the roman limes. Caesar's ditches will slow the american advance to a hault.
2. Then , by deploying his hipaspides closer to the blocked tanks, Caesar can start taking them out one by one, using tar and greek-fire.
3. Further use of flaming arows against the 101 Airborne Division marines will prove itself of greater importance on a flat terrain, where the marines will find virtually no cover, ending up beeing pinned down by a halle of arrows.
4. To counter the enemy's mortar and heavy artilery, Caesar would sent his Heavy Cavarly upon them, slashing their crews in an instant.
5. Apache helicopters watching the area will find it dificult to take out their targets, due to the fact that the battle is already engaged by romans and the americans soldiers are virtually fighting close combat, in wich the legionaries will prevail, sooner or later.
6. With the machinegun bunkers of the American Army, Caesar can only sit back and enjoy the show as his balistae and catapults blast the entranchments apart.
7. The American Comander is taken prisoner by cavalrymen, running into HQ.
8. At precisely 3 P.M , an agreement is reached by all sides.
9. 3.30 P.M an all American surrender.
10. General Staff and GI's are taken as slaves.
Quote: 1. The M1A1 Abram tanks will find themselves blocked, yes, blocked by the roman limes. Caesar's ditches will slow the american advance to a hault.
(this is my least favorite, Because its retarted. A Abrams tank would just run over a Roman. It can run over Hummers. With no prob. O and a M1A1 can go over a 5ft. ditch no prob too.)
Quote:3. Further use of flaming arows against the 101 Airborne Division marines will prove itself of greater importance on a flat terrain, where the marines will find virtually no cover, ending up beeing pinned down by a halle of arrows.
(This one is my Favorite. THERE ARE NO 101st AIRBORNE DIVISION OF MARINES. The 101st is a Army unit, known as the Screaming Eagles. Arrows mabey. Artillery fire on the Target before a landing or bombing run Definte.)
Quote:4. To counter the enemy's mortar and heavy artilery, Caesar would sent his Heavy Cavarly upon them, slashing their crews in an instant.
(Ya, Artillery isn't wide open. Its MILES behind the Front line.)
Quote:6. With the machinegun bunkers of the American Army, Caesar can only sit back and enjoy the show as his balistae and catapults blast the entranchments apart.
(Caesar would not get a chance to enjoy his Catapults destroy Bunkers. They would already be destroyed)
Quote:7. The American Comander is taken prisoner by cavalrymen, running into HQ.
(Cavalry would not make it to USHQ,theres no way.)
Quote:you can't answer this question, because there is only ONE answer. The marines will fail. No bullets, average army man today is way-under the level of a Hun warrior or Roman Legionaire.
neamtzu_rau, you are retarted.
I am a US Marine.
4th Marines, 4th AAV
MOS 1833
A Marine is not a Army man he is a MARINE.
The Marines have never lost a war, NEVER.
I cannot express how Stupid you are.
Folks just have no repesct for a m60 on a tripod vs a Roman Catapult.
The m60 can T&E rain death onto the cat crew long before they can get the cat to its range, and then spend the time to set it up. And with far more accuracy with the T&E than LobboThudius can guess where hit cat rock will come down. I'm not the only soldier that has learned how to dial T&E to walk fire onto 2000m area targets with a m60.
I really loved the way the Cobras & Apaches will wait untill the enemy is in hand to hand before doing anything... and then say there is nothing they can do. Maybe sleeping in till noon that day was a bad plan. But we gotta let them sleep sometime, since they were up all night hosing the roman tents with 7.62, 20mm, mk19 40mm & TOWs from '1000m out in the darkness somewhere'
While early times artillery men were not ready to repell a calvary charge, funny thing happens when the arty guys have m16s that can punch the cav armor with the reload times of a semiauto... meaning NONE. Each arty guy can Zero Reload Time the entire ammo loadout of a revolutionary war musketeer and then some. And you dont want to see what happens to a troop of 100horse that catches 3 tubes of CANISTER at 100m
Didnt we just see the vid of 120Abrams Grapeshot?
BTW its spelled: PSYOP's (Psychological Ops) and retarDed.
"He'll be alright, just needs someone to chuck handgrenades at 'em the rest of his life."
Doug
You know when i find a Topic i just love.
No one let me find this guy.
I just hope he doesn't live in the US.
The last thing I wanna think about while Im in Iraq is a Piece of $*#t that thinks Marines will lose.
HES NOT WORTH THE PLEASURE IT CAUSED HIS FATHER!
I would like to interject my "issue" with Reasoning with Inanimate Objects/Computers. For me it sometimes involved a 2nd story window and a baseball bat. But the arguement seldom proved my case. MORAL: If something doesn't have the capacity to understand a good argument, its best to walk away when its not so expensive yet.
Probably the same could be said for our disturbingly ignorant poster.
Stay in School, kids.
Doug
A Marine is not a Army man he is a MARINE.
The Marines have never lost a war, NEVER.
I cannot express how Stupid you are.
Could you tell me what you mean by loosing a war?
Were the Marines in Vietnam? I believe they were.
Are the Marines in A-stan? I believe they are.
Are the Marines in Iraq? I believe they are.
It's not like these wars were won/have been won/can be won.
Not to derail the thread, but it'd be nice if people didn't post stuff like this here. Speaking in absolutes doesn't help anyone.
Could you tell me what you mean by loosing a war?
Were the Marines in Vietnam? I believe they were.
Are the Marines in A-stan? I believe they are.
Are the Marines in Iraq? I believe they are.
It's not like these wars were won/have been won/can be won.
Not to derail the thread, but it'd be nice if people didn't post stuff like this here. Speaking in absolutes doesn't help anyone.
Your Right I appologize.
But those are not wars.
There is a difference in not being allowed to actually WIN,
and losing.
The emeny beats you when you lose,
that didnt happen, they were not allowed to win. It would be like playing Monopoly, but not being allowed to roll 6's or Doubles. At what point did the Marines(& all branches) get to pull a DresdenFirebombing on those opponants? No need for nukes, the Dresden move will do just fine.
Quick check: The Vietnam'ers / Afgan'ers / Iraq'ers are not rolling their tanks thru OUR capitol, so I guess we didnt LOSE the war.
Maybe what the Ceaser fanboy needs is a personality on the modern side to represent in a conflict of leaders. I nominate Patton. Now there is a guy that is actually more dangerous when he gets out of his tank, Olympic Pistolero & Master O-da Sabre
I'm with Stabby on this one. This is where assinine Rules of Engagement derail a perfectly winnable conflict. Been happening since 'Nam.
Too much time asking for permission and Not enough time getting the job done.
Doug
ps. before this gets too outta whack, we should decide when the hapless Green Thunder Gods landed. Perhaps then I might figger out the next piece(s) of the story.
Appology accepted, nothing personal at all.But, if they are not wars, how come the US government (and all the other governments in the world) calls it the War in Iraq, the War on Terrorism (that's a nice one, isn't it?), the War on Taleban, etc., etc... And yes, Vietnam was a war. @ stabbist: I'm pretty sure the US forces bombed both Vietnam, A-Stan and Iraq big time.
On 31 December 1967, the Department of Defense announced that 864,000 tons of American bombs had been dropped on North Vietnam during Rolling Thunder
.
On a different note, since when is the bombing of Dresden an acceptable move? 25.000-60.000 wounded soldiers and civilians were killed. They bombed hospitals, churches and residential areas. Fighterplanes flew low and shot people running in the streets. I don't think that the DresdenMove should be used as a reference on how to wage war. Remember who the good guys are supposed to be.
About losing the war, pulling out of a conflict isn't losing? In my mind it's accepting the defeat or imminent defeat. What you're saying is basically that an invading country can't loose, since you can just pull the troops out. But the invaded country can loose, since they must surrender at some point or face occupation. That's not logic. A large-scale evacuation of an entire invasion force should be considered a defeat, unless it is done after a victory (and no, the US has not won in Iraq just because Mr.Bush declares "Mission Accomplished" - "Bonus Points! Thanks for playing SuperMario3!"). That's how I see it anyway, and I don't wanna step on people's toes, just discuss different point of views, which I find interesting.
Trying to stay away from the political here, but one of the biggest flaws in the Vietnam and Iraqi wars was that we did not have a set goal. We didn't have a set of conditions that, when they were fulfilled, "We win. Let's go home, boys."
We have an ideal for a goal, at this moment, and that is our problem. "We win when terrorism is gone" instead of "We win when we take Bagdad." <-- And that would've been another really quick war.
/rant.
As for the topic of this thread... I'm not sure what else needs to be added to establish that the US of A would win this war...
Tema69 -- See, if our goal was to cause hysteria in Iraq, we certainly could accomplish that by removing our troops. :D
Trying to stay away from the political here, but one of the biggest flaws in the Vietnam and Iraqi wars was that we did not have a set goal. We didn't have a set of conditions that, when they were fulfilled, "We win. Let's go home, boys."
We have an ideal for a goal, at this moment, and that is our problem. "We win when terrorism is gone" instead of "We win when we take Bagdad." <-- And that would've been another really quick war.
/rant.
As for the topic of this thread... I'm not sure what else needs to be added to establish that the US of A would win this war...
No need to remove the troops, chaos and hysteria is already present.
But yeah, that's what our government is being critisized for about Iraq and Afghanistan. We pulled out of Iraq a few months ago, but reinforced our base in A-stan.
NUKE EM' FTW
(try to throw a spear at THAT Rome :D ...)
Rules are for folks that agree to use them. We all know what BlackFlag is, but nobody want to be the first to raise it.... execept for Rome, they will have no problem diplomaticly cutting the rope that ties our military hands. If they want to have a TownBurning No Rules war because Rome bends knee to nobody: So be it, we accept the terms.
Look at it this way,
The folks that want to burn towns will get their town burnt by us.... They just figured it couldnt happen to Rome surrounded by legions of defenders.
BTW, no matter how many bombs you drop on the jungle, the enemy in town will still shoot at you tomorrow. Didnt you see Serenity? When your quarry goes to ground, you destroy all its holes, you dont shoot up the field where the target isnt.
Now, asides from comparing unit to unit and technology to technology in terms of "this side will win x percent of the time", we need to set up an actual scenario and have it play out in a variety of situations (night, day, better weather, worse weather, etc) to get a more accurate idea.
Do you presume that all ancient men are scared of metal monsters ?
They did have metal-monsters of their own ( balistae, catapults, onagers,siege towers, wich had some metal in them).
Technology doesn't scare the crap outta romans. It only makes them, curioser. As soon as they see real humans comin' out of those monsters and fire just one single arrow, to test their GOD LIKE POWER, in their neck, aaand as soon as one GOD who CAME FROM THE FUTURE , starts bleeding and screaming "MEEEDIIIC ! " on the sand, now, they WILL realise something not quite right with them, "invincible" gods of yours.
Where would they refuel ? Even the aircraft carrier transported back thru time would eventually encounter this problem. Answer me this : How would ur guys solve the maintanence issues that come along with mecanical hardware ? Where can u find replacement parts for ur abrams and apache helicopters in a region and a time scale where there is only rocks and iron age tools ALL around ? mm ? I=m curious to know.
After 30 months, your army has no suplly , no fuel, no energy, no spare-parts , no bullets , nothing MODERN left functional . What then, Sherlock?
Back to sticks and stones ? oh, the whole world hates ya, remember the massacres you send your soldiers too. They'll never forgive you , guys. They'll hunt you down, like sheep.
If you think americans are impervious to arrows, rocks, flaming projectiles and have imune systems that allows them to survive the ancient plague, cholera, tifos and every litlle single virus that existed that time on earth, you are one stupid individual of your race.
Sorry, you ashamed my human condition with your blatant and iconsistent remarcks.
I will not waste any more energy with a moron, who thinks american soldiers are terminators. You are a snale, for all I care.
Wait...Not required. Rome would love to have you as an ally. Until the right moment, that is, after they have studied your weaknesses and learn to use that equipment of yours. You should show some transparency, either that, or the deal is off.
And you have like two thirds of your division made off italo-americans. Killing their ancestors would mean , killing your men. So you strike a deal, right there and now. You also wait for enemies of Rome to make her weak.
Like 100 m16 Infantry vs 100 Roman Infantry?
But we also need to stop the selective enviroment, so define a known location for the battle as well.
Case 1: Fair Fight
Modern: Company of Infantry
--- 60 Riflemen
--- 20 SAW
--- 20 m20
Roman: 100 Infantry
--- (???) 100 Sword/Shield & Pilum
Location: Omaha Beach (Romans get choice of position)
Case 2: Unfair Fight
Modern: Mechanized Infantry Company
--- 20 vehicles
--- 100 men
Roman: 300
--- (??) 250 Infantry
--- (??) 50 Light Cav
Location: Gettysburg Battlefield
Now in bothe the fair fight (1:1) and the Unfair Fight (3:1), I think we
know how both will pan out.
Heck, even if we give the Romans the cliffs at Omaha, they will still lose bigtime vs Riflemen. Other than some custom fanboy dream setup that has the Modern guys walking into the sewers with handcuffs on, what more than the german setup at Omaha can we give them?
Rephrasing that: Did it seem like anyone arguing for the Romans wasn't an American hater/Roman fanboy? (Note: I'm not saying they're American haters; some just come off like that... probably due to liking the Roman Empire more and thus bashing the U.S. over it.)
United Stats Armed Forces Vs. Roman Empire
The war takes a day, maybe two, before the Roman Empire is a headless snake. The U.S. sends snipers to assassinate leaders, or if they're even smarter (and hey, it wouldn't be a stretch of our usual tactic), we'll bomb the hell out of the capital at night without risking a single man or the enemy identifying our dragons and roks.
And playing the temporal paradox card is stupid when you're simply making a discussion to compare power. If this scenario did happen, and there was a founded fear of paradox, the US Armed forces would likely re-group and stay away from existing civilization, probably heading to the least-inhabited lands of the time to build up, research, and find a way back home.
Ramblings from your quoted poster do nothing but fuel frustration and (if widespread enough) make the rest of the gaming community look like immature whackjobs.
Please, devote Your intelligent efforts to Master Vega's other thread of this era. And buy that kid a Hooked on Phonics book or some nice colorful sponges or something....
Ragitsu -- I don't mean any offense by this, but that last post (the quote I mean) didn't help at all as a counter-argument.
The U.S. sends snipers to assassinate leaders.
*shrugs* He just repeated it while phrasing it differently.
As for snipers...that's creepy, because last night I thought to myself "couldn't the U.S. military send out a US Marine Force Recon Scout Sniper or perhaps Delta posing as the natives to take out any leaders?"
I have nothing but respect for you Ragitsu but WHERE DO YOU FIND SUCH GARBAGE?!?!?
Please, devote Your intelligent efforts to Master Vega's other thread of this era. And buy that kid a Hooked on Phonics book or some nice colorful sponges or something....
On the IMDB - there's good stuff, but every now and again a headache causing poster comes along to argue against all reason.
Finally, just because there's one bullheaded person on a certain "side", doesn't mean the entire topic doesn't merit discussion.
Finally, just because there's one bullheaded person on a certain "side", doesn't mean the entire topic doesn't merit discussion.
and its because of this as why i haven't asked this thread be closed.....
*shrugs* He just repeated it while phrasing it differently.
As for snipers...that's creepy, because last night I thought to myself "couldn't the U.S. military send out a US Marine Force Recon Scout Sniper or perhaps Delta posing as the natives to take out any leaders?"
On the IMDB - there's good stuff, but every now and again a headache causing poster comes along to argue against all reason.
Finally, just because there's one bullheaded person on a certain "side", doesn't mean the entire topic doesn't merit discussion.
HAHA
USMC Force Recon, now those guys are B A.
Time is on the side of whomever inhabits the time period; if a legion were transported to the present, time would be on the side of the U. S. forces, because the Romans lack knowledge of the terrain, language, technology, and a viable supply base. If a mechanized infantry company (for example; everything depends on what we mean by "U. S. forces") was transported to 1st century Gaul, the opposite would be true.
This idea presupposes a protracted conflict: in a short, sharp engagement the result depends on range and mass. If we put a prepared legion on top of the mechanized infantry camp, they'd inflict terrible losses before being repelled. If they withdrew, the Americans would obliterate them as most of thier tactics and weapons depend on engaging the enemy at range. That said, if a prepared American force saw a legion approaching, they would obliterate them completely; largely because, due to the nature of massed formations necessitated by linear infantry combat, the Romans lack the ability to effectively disperse and re-form at a pre-established rally point (something the Gauls and Germans could do, by the way.)
Of course, the two forces might not fight at all. An intelligent American or Roman commander would learn as much as possible about the opposing force and report back to their superiors. Assuming both forces found themselves on an alien world, doubtless victims of capricious aliens a la Jerry Pournelle, they'd probably decide to cooperate. On a virgin world the Romans have the long term advantage of understanding low-tech while the Americans have the short-term advantage of overwhelming force.
How's this for a campaign idea? An empty world, into which people from various times and places slip. On the east coast of a deserted America, we find the lost Roanoke colony. In Europe, a lost legion returns to Italy to find a wilderness. A flight of training bombers makes a forced landing in Florida after discovering civilization has disappeared during their manuevers over the Carribean. The Anasazi begin sending scouts across the plains when traders from other tribes fail to arrive for two years running...
On a virgin world the Romans have the long term advantage of understanding low-tech while the Americans have the short-term advantage of overwhelming force.
Excellent point!
I didn't even consider that.Ah, it seems that folks are missing a few points on this thread.
10 Reasons why Ancient Rome would lose to a Modern American Expiditionary force:
4: Romans have no defense against Psi Ops. Just take a village and introduce the printing press....then drop leaflet propaganda all over Rome and its client states. A civil war in the Empire could easily be started. The pen IS mightier than the sword!
Illiteracy is a pretty strong defence against psi-ops. yes, ancient Rome was famed for having a high literacy rate... among citizens. Non-citizens were generally illiterate to the last man, unless they were privileged slaves working as, for example, tutors. Such slaves tended to be born into slavery, and as any historian will tell you, those born as slaves do not not make effective rebels, even more so if they see themselves as privileged anyway, which household slaves would do.
8: American soldiers are more resistant to disease because they are vaccinated against it.
They are vaccinated against modern diseases. Against many of the diseases of the day (smallpox, for example), the Americans have no vaccination, simply because modern man has 'eradicated' them.
9: If the Americans set about to freeing Roman slaves and offering a democratic society, they could build quite an army of followers (Think Spartacustimes 1000).
Those were exceptional circumstances. Slaves born as slaves tend not to rebel efficiently.
If you want to read a book along these lines, I suggest Lest Darkness Fall by L. Sprague de Camp
Yes, because fiction is proof of facts. An author's job is to give entertainment first, and facts second. Guess which gives way in a conflict between the two.
Some of your points were good, some not so good...
I'll say the same here.
Illiteracy is a pretty strong defence against psi-ops. yes, ancient Rome was famed for having a high literacy rate... among citizens. Non-citizens were generally illiterate to the last man, unless they were privileged slaves working as, for example, tutors. Such slaves tended to be born into slavery, and as any historian will tell you, those born as slaves do not not make effective rebels, even more so if they see themselves as privileged anyway, which household slaves would do.
Heh....
Few people actually understand the capabilities of PSYOP's(Psychological Operations). Not all Psyop media is written word and sometimes the messages are developed to overcome the condition of illiteracy. Pictographs are a common language forum that surpasses language barriers even during the Roman times. Look at the Men's/Women's restroom sign with the stick figures. Drive in a foreign country and check out the signs. The book Farenheit 451(sp.) reasoned banning and then burning books because this written media upset people and caused them to do reckless things. Consequently that society went to pictographs. A format everyone understood regardless of language. For more non-literate Psyop message examples look at my last post on the Vietnam Campaign thread.
They are vaccinated against modern diseases. Against many of the diseases of the day (smallpox, for example), the Americans have no vaccination, simply because modern man has 'eradicated' them.
Smallpox DOES still exist in the world in third world countries today. GI's deploying to these areas are current on their shots and unit medics combat this when assigned in the area as well for a Hearts and Minds campaign. Every military medical center I've been to has a supply of these and other vaccines.
Those were exceptional circumstances. Slaves born as slaves tend not to rebel efficiently.
Doesn't mean that they WON'T rebel. Given the proper guidance, they can do anything. One of my favorite stories of Nam' is that a 12 yr old little GIRL held a marine platoon at bay with an AK-47. The engagement last for a day or so. Twelve years old. Sounds like the same body weight and motivation.
I enjoy that you play Devil's Advocate here and I think you had some good ideas on the China Invasion thread. We could use you here on this thread. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1022027
Thanks to all,
Doug
A) They had a miserable Navy.
B) The converted SuperCargos with hydroplane rockets & blowoff bows were never statted. Need the boat specifics first.
"The sea, it take my butt and throws me around. Yo Ho, Can't find the ground."
Doug
Yes, because fiction is proof of facts. An author's job is to give entertainment first, and facts second. Guess which gives way in a conflict between the two.
Another good point
.Though it makes you wonder how much substitution will still occur despite whatever facts are present: some gaps had to be filled sooner or later.
Some of your points were good, some not so good...
Illiteracy is a pretty strong defence against psi-ops. yes, ancient Rome was famed for having a high literacy rate... among citizens. Non-citizens were generally illiterate to the last man,
Cartoons were some of our most effective psi-ops
They are vaccinated against modern diseases. Against many of the diseases of the day (smallpox, for example), the Americans have no vaccination, simply because modern man has 'eradicated' them.
this was discussed before. Unless the actual roman had previously gotten sick and lived through smallpox, his immunity to it would be no different than an italian pulled out of his pizza parlor right now today. They'd both have a small chance of already carrying a total geneic immunity that the entire native american population lacked, and a strong chance of carrying a limited genetic immunity that also the entire native american population lacked. Now on top of that, you have exposure to other similar pox diseases, which doesn't grant immunity, but does give the body a fighting head start (well, cowpox exposure stood a very good chance of giving you total immunity, but only people with their heads regularly pressed to cow udders got that) which again, no cowpox, camelpox, goatpox, monkeypox, and other Orthopox viruses, and their close relative Herpes, i.e. chickenpox, shingles, STD herpes, and coldsores' all of which the native american population had never been exposed to and hence didn't have.
Don't get me wrong, smallpox hitting EITHER group would cause huge problems. I am saying that don't think the US troops would fare like the Native Americans. I am also saying don't think the romans would be just fine either. There was a reason we eradicated smallpox. Because it killed lots and lots of people when outbreaks happened. It has something like a 10% killrate in cultures that were repeatedly exposed to it, and a 30-60% killrate in 'virgin' cultures (note not all cultures are equally 'virgin', a culture exposed to smallpox distant cousins like herpes are going to be in the 30% range, those not are going to be higher. Communal living other factors would increase it even more)
just a quick google "smallpox rome" brings me "The first serious outbreak of smallpox occurred in Rome in AD 165. It is estimated that in a fifteen year period about a third of Rome's population died of the disease. Smallpox first arrived in England in the 16th century. Symptoms include fever and skin-eruptions. If patients recovered they suffered permanent scaring of the skin. In the 18th century smallpox was responsible for more than 10% of all deaths. About 15% of people who caught smallpox died of the disease"
Those same non-pox diseases that our soldiers are immunized against today....they would still be present, so some romans would be getting sick from them even if at a low rate, while the US would not. We would loose no-one to measles, mumps, diptheria, tetnus, teburculosus, rubella or a bunch of others. Combined with a better understanding of how disease transmits, washing hands, better food handling, etc, and you go even more in the US's favor. Add on general better health, makes you more disease resistant, and again US is favored. Heck, some enterprising commander might have all his men crapping upstream of the Roman Camps trying to give them Cholera
Those were exceptional circumstances. Slaves born as slaves tend not to rebel efficiently.
you don't have to rebel effectively to cause huge problems. Every slave is a double problem. You have to pull fighters away from the front to deal with the slaves. While the slaves are busy getting their butts kicked, who is mining the salt, threshing the grain, baking the bread, sweeping the streets? Especailly all the jobs where the revolting slave meets his ultimate demise.
I'll say the same here.
Smallpox DOES still exist in the world in third world countries today. GI's deploying to these areas are current on their shots and unit medics combat this when assigned in the area as well for a Hearts and Minds campaign. Every military medical center I've been to has a supply of these and other vaccines.
Doug
Sorry, Doug, either you just accidentally let slip a super-classified top secret, or you are dead wrong.
Smallpox was COMPLETELY eradicated, even in the farthest corner of every last third world country. Smallpox does not exist in nature any more.
But you are right, our soldiers are getting the vaccine, because smallpox exists in labs, and we fear someone will use it as a biological weapon.
See the book The Eradication of Smallpox: Edward Jenner and The First and Only Eradication of a Human Infectious Disease by Herve Bazin
Academic Press, ISBN 0120834758, 2000
If we go back to the Roman days,
that would be BEFORE we made any agreements (Gen/Hague) on using & not using chem/bio weapons: It wasnt illegal til we made a law for it, and the poor Romans we infect will have to wait lots of centuries before it is time for us to stop spraying them from choppers.
How many 155mm Chemical Shells does it take to ruin a town?
Just one, Baby... Just one.
I dont think the Roman NBC officers get the same level of DeCon training we do, and just what was a Roman MOPP suit? A burlap sack over your nose?
I don't think time travel was considered when the conventions were finalized.
To partially circumvent the treaty of START, the missile, utilizing the capacity unused due to 10 warhead limitation, was equipped with 40 heavy decoys.[1] These decoys would appear as warheads to any defensive system, making each missile as hard to intercept as 50 single-warhead, rendering potential ABM systems ineffective.
Boosted fission, up to 20 Mt of TNT. That's 5 times more than the Castle Bravo thermonuclear device used in the Bikini atol, back in the 50's by the U.S
2 of these would reduce NY to a small hillbilly shack...
---
Lol.
I just hope he doesn't live in the US.
To which they said this before,
I'm from your own insignificant country. Imagine that. And you are still avoiding my questions like crazy. I know I'm right, why can't you just admit defeat and spare us both some neuron back-breacking time huh ?
Sorry, Doug, either you just accidentally let slip a super-classified top secret, or you are dead wrong.
Smallpox was COMPLETELY eradicated, even in the farthest corner of every last third world country. Smallpox does not exist in nature any more.
But you are right, our soldiers are getting the vaccine, because smallpox exists in labs, and we fear someone will use it as a biological weapon.
See the book The Eradication of Smallpox: Edward Jenner and The First and Only Eradication of a Human Infectious Disease by Herve Bazin
Academic Press, ISBN 0120834758, 2000
Thanks for the ISBN# on that. It'll give me something to look for later. I don't know when the book was written but I did NBC school back in May '97. Part of the info the Army was putting out was that Smallpox does exist in the world and in labs. Given the amount of falsehoods that have been occurring at the behest of the govt, its Very possible that we were taught more wrong info or the author did not have access to the data that we did. Matters not.
This thread suddenly went the route of NBC Warfare. Disturbing.
Again, I'll bring up the point of scale and what is a "fair" fight. Stabbist mentioned something that resembled this on the last page. Also mentioned was that fights don't "erupt" with the combatants already embroiled in the fighting. They move towards each other and decide to occupy each others space. Its the buildup to this is what the Fanboy is not understanding. The American war policy actively pursues engaging targets over a Non Line Of Sight (NLOS) and Line Of Sight (LOS). With the logic of "If I can smell them, then they've gotten too close and I need to be killed for my stupidity". We've had multiple centuries of being kicked in the teeth to learn this and I don't see why we'd forget it when being threatened by Skirt Wearing Badboy Athletics Club members with pointy things.
"The Defense Department regrets to inform you that your sons are dead because they were Stupid".
Doug
Which terraign would the romans want?
Would they take the cliffs? 2000 vs 2000: Given the lack of roman artillery accuracy & range, the landing craft could just sit 400m out in the swells and let the riflemen spend 1 magazine each (5-6 rnd bursts or slowfire) to engage & beat the roman arty. Then close to 250m and do the same against the roman arhers. Then take their time walking onto the beach, and picking off romans that peep over the edge.
This is of course assuming the landing craft disembarked from a transport ship without escort... you dont want to know how sad it would be for the romans if there was just 1 Gleaves or Fletcher destroyer 5000yd out. Even just a couple Twin-40Bofor raining autocannon on the romans would do the job (bofors at 6000m is just 10degrees loft).
It would be just rude to explain how utterly shreaded a roman landing attempt would be vs a single Bradley with 25mm killing boats & drowning men.... and forget all about the "cover of darkness" plan, wont work vs IR.
But what about Gettysberg?
Rolling hills would again give the range advantage to the riflemen, who are trained for manuever (skirmish). Still looking at a 50:1 or more kill rate. Although technically, it cant be a 50:1 if the romans lose 5000men without killing a single guy of the 100 rifleman.
If you were the roman commander,
and just saw your 5000man assualt wiped out without drawing enemy blood, would you commit your reserve 1000 into that same meat grinder or would you attempt to parley? So you march your colorguard out to the middle of the field to parley, and the thundermachine flying waggon comes over, lands, and out come a couple guys to take you up to soar like Iccarus (without melting). You negotiate safe haven retirement & an entire village in the hills in exchange for their service to Rome of breaking the seige of some enemy. Good news for you though, they say they can raze that town 3 days away & be back here by dinner time, Hail Rome. Hail Rome indeed.
100 man 12B unit? Spears and arrows not withstanding (or paradoxes or officer bureaucracy), they would delight in creating ALL SORTS (tm) of lethal goodness. I haven't met a 12B yet that was 100% right in the head (same for Arty or Psyop guys. Hmmm...) that didn't appreciate some mechanical mayhem device.
I think that it comes from the innate enjoyment of explosions, as soon as you give a full-grown man a brick of C4, he turns back into a child playing with matches, just these matches can take down buildings when applied to the right points. Heck, I think a large part of the enjoyment of guns comes from the explosion you cause, along with the satisfaction of seeing a hole in the ten-ring.
I wonder if the college I am planning on going to has any classes that teach the science related to demolitions, it strikes me as something a fellow ought to know.
It would be interesting to see just how far Rome would allow the Americans to go from the standards of the time period, a wise emperor would not push them, since they don't know how much ammo is left, but slavery was the norm in Rome back then, as was racism (I think, right?), the Americans would probably require absolute control over the laws of the area they had under control, larger than a village if they had good negotiators.
Like I said about the Omaha Beach scenario
Which terraign would the romans want?
Well, the romans could hide along the cliffs, and wait until the US forces were climbing up, and then roll some rocks down oh them and hurl spears. They may actually take a few men with them before being completely obliterated
2000 vs 2000.
Okay, that is just silly. Maybe it is my wargaming background, but I in no way am going to be measuring 'fairness' in terms of numbers. Again, we can go to the US military style of upgrading. Example: We had 10 Cobras in this squadron of attack helos, but we are upgrading to Apaches. Apaches are better, so we can have an 8 Apache squadron and be equally combat effective, i.e. we can smoke the same amount of enemy tanks.
I don't know how even the silliest fanboy can consider equal numbers as anything but modern wins. I don't see how even the silliest fanboy can consider the entire empire vs the entire X branch of Y modern country armoy.
What I find interesting is the balance point between forces. How many of X forces equals Y romans?
Obviously, "1 Payroll Officer armed with M9" vs the Entire Roman Empire, well in that case, team timetraveler looses.
One fireteam vs Entire Roman Empire same thing.
What about One Infantry Company vs Y number of Roman Legions
Remember, not all legions were the same size throughout history, so lets use "Marion Legion" standards of 5120 men, 4700 infantry and 420 heavy cavalry. Each with 15 days supply of food carried on person, and 1 mule per 8 men. Plus about 1000 auxillia, which would be slingers, skirmishers, and usually 10 "speculatores" which was a light mounted unit for reconnosance and to act as messangers. One ballista per century and one Onager (catapult) per cohort gives 50-60 ballista and 10 Onagers
I've broke down a US Rifleman Company partway in another post from before Rifle Company = 3 rifle platoon, +1 weapons platoon
3 60mm M224 mortar each manned by 3 men with M4s
4 M-2 heavy macineguns
2 Mk 19 automatic grenade launchers
12 Anti-tank rocket totting troopers (half from heavy weapons platoon half from the 3 rifle) who also have M4s
6 Medium Machineguns
18 SAW Light Machineguns
18 Grenadiers with M203 underslung grenade lauchers
72 riflemen, radiomen, team leaders, staff sgts, assisant gunners with M16s or M4s
So, how many legions would a single Rifle Company defeat before eventually succumbing?
My bet is they only need to inflict about 1000 losses on the 6000+ man fighitng force before it broke and ran. I expect as long as the romans could keep on sending legions who hadn't heard about how the last one fared, they could probably do this to 10 legions using the 'big guns' and another 10 before ammo in the lighter weapons became a concern, at which time they'd probably use up the last of the 'big gun' ammo and go guerilla with the remaining 5.56 and 7.62nato weapons. Once they went guerilla they woudl be undefeatable, but the romans could task a couple legions to the area, keep them tied up fighting eachother, while they took the remnamts of the 20 slaughtered legions and marched them off somewere to fight some nice Gauls.
Thanks for the ISBN# on that. It'll give me something to look for later. I don't know when the book was written but I did NBC school back in May '97. Part of the info the Army was putting out was that Smallpox does exist in the world and in labs. Given the amount of falsehoods that have been occurring at the behest of the govt, its Very possible that we were taught more wrong info or the author did not have access to the data that we did. Matters not.
Doug
Okay, grab that individual book if you like, but there have been literally dozens of books and hundreds of magazine articles written about the eradication of smallpox and the man who spearheaded the effort, Edward Jenner. Google, go to your local library or bookstore, whatever.
Yes, the guy writing that book and many other writers on the subject would have had the same access. Basically anything told to a grunt, they would be able to turn up. Like I said, if you really knew something they didn't know, you'd be someone with very high security clearance, and know such info was top secret, and not reveal it. Remember, most of the guys writing about this stuff are CDC advisors, well established researchers, and the like. The guys the high tie wearers in the government turn to for answers.
I suspect that the military was very careful to tell you the technical truth, but to give it to you in a way that made their desire for you to cooperate and take the vaccine without any fuss. As I said, it has been completely eradicated IN NATURE. It still exists in labs. Hence if you were recalling them saying "It still exists in the world. It still exists in labs" that would be the truth, because if it does exist in 2 labs, even US controled supersecure labs, then it still exists "in the world" and it is pretty common knowledge that there are about half a dozen labs that openly have the stuff, probably twice as many that are quiet about it. Plus, about 10 years ago some stuffy old library got ahold of a diary from a civil war military surgeon. Well, the diary's author had taken some scabs off of a smallpox victim and stuck em in an envelope and stuck em in the diary, and it sure gave the modern day librarians a scare. Now, no way those old scabs could infect anyone like that. However, some ill intentioned country with some serious research facilites but no smallpox of their own could definately have taken the 'software' from the dead viruses and got it into some other living viruses and caused all sorts of havok.
So it is reasonable that troops be vaccinated against it. Just realize, ANY smallpox case that comes up, it is going to be the result of a lab getting extremely careless, or it is going to be some terroirst/crazy government doing nasty stuff. You aren't EVER going to bump into some randomly sick people with smallpox, even in the most distant corner of the world.
I'm not challenging your statements and I'm sure you have page numbers to back up your story.
Yes, I did have a security clearance. Yes, we had a couple fellas show up from CDC field some random questions when they showed up to chat with our instructor. Ft Bragg draws in people from various branches and nations. BIO was only part of the course. I wasn't a Chem MOS type, I was PSYOP. NBC school was a class to act as a liason between those guys and my commander. A class I needed for a promotion. I didn't even want to go but I needed a "leg up" on the rest of the guys in my unit.
Truth be told, those old manuals are in the back of my closet somewhere in a box. I'll leave the Tie-Wearing fools to plot the next Super-Virus that'll kill off the world. Its someone else's problem now.
I'm a civilian now. Gaming night, 9-5, Flip Flops and all.
Doug
but with enough tequilla you become stoppable again.
(they wouldnt have named it a Sunrise if you weent supposed to drink it with breakfast
... it even has OJ in it, what more could you want )Which brings up another reason for Rome to parley,
We can teache them what the real purpose of growing grain is. They were still wasting crop on bread, when they should have been brew & stilling it.
"Very tastey wine there Caludius.
I'll drink a pint of your wine, you drink a pint of my CornWhiskey, and then we'll wrestle for the village"
With enough military experience you become unstoppable,
but with enough tequila you become stoppable again.
(they wouldn't have named it a Sunrise if you went supposed to drink it with breakfast
Which brings up another reason for Rome to parley,
We can teach them what the real purpose of growing grain is. They were still wasting crop on bread, when they should have been brew & stilling it.
"Very tasty wine there Claudius.
I'll drink a pint of your wine, you drink a pint of my Corn Whiskey, and then we'll wrestle for the village"
Don't do that so early in the morning. I almost choked on my apple fritter from laughing so hard.
Actually, I think the term you're looking for is Wrasslin'. But it wouldn't be too much different then how we got the upper 2/3 of the state of Maine.
Being ex-military didn't make me unstoppable. Just less sensitive to sissies and the PC crowd (and a few others come to think of it...)
Growing up on the border just made Tequila a substitute mother's milk for me. And I'll sprinkle it with OJ.
Doug
and here I was thinking I liked Tequila.
Doug
Anyways, back to the battlefield...would you say use of flamethrowers would be seen as technology or magic?
We should shoot some of those guys & grab the Flamers for our troops.
Rare? Medium Rare? Well Done? Or angry and kicking still?
But no, I don't think the flame thrower would be a good weapon. It is relatively short ranged. Remember, it's main purpose was to get shoved in a bunker and then fired. But even then the purpose wasn't to burn the defenders, but suck the oxygen out and suffocate anyone hiding down here. It had the secondary use of being a good way of getting people to run out of the bushes they were hiding it, but it wasn't really a front line weapon.
I am also pretty sure I'd not want the fuel tank strapped to my back.
Considering that Bronze age Greece had Greek fire, which the Greek navy sprayed from a primitive flame thrower on to enemy ships, I would have to say that modern Flamethrowers would be percieved as Technology, now a gernade launcher I could see them mistaking for magic, but I'd have to say that much like a present day human a Roman would most likely be terrified of a flamethrower because it was a flamethrower but, not out of superststious dread.
Good points all around.
Now, flamethrower + grenade = White Phosphorus grenade (Willie P)
That would be effective both in terms of damage and lowering morale.
Good points all around.
Now, flamethrower + grenade = White Phosphorus grenade (Willie P)
That would be effective both in terms of damage and lowering morale.
I believe the phrase you're looking for is "Snake and Nape". Double whammy of Willey Pete and Napalm. Which WILL get anyone's attention when dropped Near them let alone On them. Put a beatdown on the first couple hundred and then the rest Seriously consider Mutiny or motivated AWOL. Its up to discipline to figure out the rest...
"I think I'm starting to feel the FEAR". Dr Gonzo.
Doug
Before any sensible discusion can take place, we need to know what the time travellers actually will have acces to, and possibly also what the victory conditions are.
That was essentially the logic I was using on the Earth 2.0 thread. I've been doing "homework" on the Vicenza Army Post to figure out all the Pros and Cons of this eventuality. We're just stalled as far as a starting timeline but the rest will shape up soon enough. All are welcome.
Doug
Considering that Bronze age Greece had Greek fire, which the Greek navy sprayed from a primitive flame thrower on to enemy ships, I would have to say that modern Flamethrowers would be percieved as Technology, now a gernade launcher I could see them mistaking for magic, but I'd have to say that much like a present day human a Roman would most likely be terrified of a flamethrower because it was a flamethrower but, not out of superststious dread.
On the bright side: They forgot to put a lug to mount an M44 bayonet on the flamethrower.
The creator of the original post on IMDB said just the US military, so it would be fair to assume the whole US military, or at least that you get to pick what part of the US military. I vote some amount of the Air force with an attachment of infantry (army or marines, don't matter to me), they take out the emperor's palace, announce that they are taking over, screw the timeline. Or they could just do the wipe out huge amounts of enemies and offer their services for their own land, if they don't want the burden of leadership. A-10s strafing infantry lines would demoralize the romans pretty quick, wouldn't you say? I still think it would be more effective to just take over, less fighting needed to be done, kill the first few people that protest your rule, and they will stop trying.
ok, I give them 3 months before they run out of food, even if they asset-strip the entire Roman empire for food supplies.
Food production technology in those days just couldn't handle that kind of sudden increase in population, let alone food transportation technology.
On the bright side: They forgot to put a lug to mount an M44 bayonet on the flamethrower.
The creator of the original post on IMDB said just the US military, so it would be fair to assume the whole US military, or at least that you get to pick what part of the US military. I vote some amount of the Air force with an attachment of infantry (army or marines, don't matter to me), they take out the emperor's palace, announce that they are taking over, screw the timeline. Or they could just do the wipe out huge amounts of enemies and offer their services for their own land, if they don't want the burden of leadership. A-10s strafing infantry lines would demoralize the romans pretty quick, wouldn't you say? I still think it would be more effective to just take over, less fighting needed to be done, kill the first few people that protest your rule, and they will stop trying.
If there were engineers with the U.S. detachment, do you think they can actually set up factories and start producing ammunition and fuel in time?
You wouldn't need an A-10 flying the friendly skies, just one battery (Artillery company) of MLRS shooting ATACMs rounds. Standard MLRS round 650 submunitions, ATACM is 1250 submunitions. ONE ATACMs round KILLS a 1000m x 1000m grid square and all the vehicles inside. Not to mention the crunchies on the ground.
Water Purification and Petroleum Specialists (fuelers) could keep the Units moving long enough to start converting over to still based ethanols. The diesel stuff and JP series fuels would be saved for Tracks (tanks, apc, self propelled arty) and Helos respectively. Humvees and some generators can be converted and some trucks were made for multiple fuel type use. Look up the old Twilight2000 stuff for more examples.
In the meantime our fuelers also get busy grading various types of petroleum and other local oils. The Water Purification guys get together with Army Watercraft Operators (was MOS 88K) and fish like insane monsters while pumping out potable water for the masses.
Engineering types get out the Gamma Goat vehicles and clear acres of land to get ready for potatoes and other fast growing grains.
To conserve fuels, the Army brings with them massive amount of folding mountain bikes (one per soldier) that to accomplish the more mundane tasks. This can also double for RECON missions and Resupply near the Frontlines. Additionally it gives the soldiers the opportunity for daily cardio conditioning because they're about to be the New World Rulers.
Too many ifs and not enough conditions. If this was a planned deal, then theres no reason in the world why Task Force Traveller wouldn't bring enough beans, bullets, and kitchen sinks for all. There would still be time to build the factories and other manufacturing plants to keep the War Machine going to accomplish worldwide Pax Americana. Then they would be able to give the Space Aliens "what for".
And on, and on, and on......
Last stop for SanityVille
Doug
Frankly, once they run out of the food supplies they bring with them, there isn't enough food in the entire empire to feed them.
Screw the ammunition. That's the least of their worries now.
If you are bringing agricultural equipment and modern grains and stuff to kick-start an agricultural revolution, well, that's suddenly not JUST the entire US army now. Stop moving the goalposts. At that point, you may as well pit the entire modern world, complete with infrastructure, against the Roman empire.
I've broke down a US Rifleman Company partway in another post from before Rifle Company = 3 rifle platoon, +1 weapons platoon
3 60mm M224 mortar each manned by 3 men with M4s
4 M-2 heavy machine guns
2 Mk 19 automatic grenade launchers
12 Anti-tank rocket totting troopers (half from heavy weapons platoon half from the 3 rifle) who also have M4s
6 Medium Machine guns
18 SAW Light Machine guns
18 Grenadiers with M203 underslung grenade launchers
72 riflemen, radiomen, team leaders, staff sgts, assistant gunners with M16s or M4s
Is that what this is?
If so, how far can the grenades fly?
If it were all the US military, they would outnumber the population of the entire Italian peninsula.
Frankly, once they run out of the food supplies they bring with them, there isn't enough food in the entire empire to feed them.
Screw the ammunition. That's the least of their worries now.
If you are bringing agricultural equipment and modern grains and stuff to kick-start an agricultural revolution, well, that's suddenly not JUST the entire US army now. Stop moving the goalposts. At that point, you may as well pit the entire modern world, complete with infrastructure, against the Roman empire.
At its height the Roman empire is accorded to host over 100 million people and the City of Rome well over 1 million people in and of itself. The Huns made a pretty good living pillaging Roman agriculture to feed and supply not just the Hun army but most of its population. This coupled with natural resources (hunting, fishing, and foraging) the only reason US forces would starve would be if they did NOT exploit local food resources.
BTW have we decided if (1) the US forces came of their own volition and could prepare and appropriately equip for the mission; or (2) the US forces were just time-shifted as found right this second.
Next have we decided (1) the US forces get to choose the location they time-shift into; or (2) if they do not get to choose, where are they summarily dumped?
To both questions if (1) is true then the US military time-shifts with a mix of 50% modern combat forces including Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine elements; 25% logistical forces (can scratch build/grow anything given raw resources, and come with a 5-year supply cachet to get started); and 25% technology forces (i.e. rockets and satellites). I put them in East-Coast America and set the logistics guys and part of the combat forces to work setting up supply chains and employing the natives. The tech guys launch their satelites to give GPS and "eyes in the skies". Naval forces project power into the Mediterranean and anything within 250 miles of the coasts feels the US presence. Hire some local Romans to act as emissaries and deliver demands to Rome. A wall of steel chokes Mediterranean shipping to a standstill and the City of Rome collapses within a month due to food-shortages and riots; the emperor (assuming he wasn't killed by his own people) capitulates to reasonable US demands for supplies, bases, and slaves. If anything gets sketchy, US forces can easily withdraw back accross the Atlantic to regroup, replan, and retry.
@ Ragitsu, that is a Mk-19.
Once let's just start a list of who actually came through the TIME Portal.
Marines?
Army?
Air Force?
Navy?
Coast Gaurd?
any special divisions?
AAVs?
Air Wings?
Destroyers?
Special Ops (Force Recon, SEALS, Green Berets)?
Civilian Contractors?
This thread is a war situation assuming that it's either the entire US military, or some portion thereof.
ok,
Once let's just start a list of who actually came through the TIME Portal.
Marines?
Army?
Air Force?
Navy?
Coast Gaurd?
any special divisions?
AAVs?
Air Wings?
Destroyers?
Special Ops (Force Recon, SEALS, Green Berets)?
Civilian Contractors?
Let's say the Army for sure...aren't they the ones that specialize in holding large areas of land? The Marines are almost a given as well.
Also, how critical would the Navy's role be here? As for the Air Force: it depends on whether or not they have a suitable support structure.
Navy would allow invasion of the Americas, Australia, and all those other islands.
I think that the war could be over before people ran out of gas, surgical strike on the leadership, drop in some troops claiming the roman empire for the USA, use CAS and the infantry to shoot the ones that try to contest the claim, get navy and artillery to cover where any attacking armies would come through attempting to reclaim the empire, after the first few get blown up out of nowhere, I think the resistance would die down, unless they went guerilla, which I don't know if they would be smart enough to do.
edit: Ooh, does that MK. 19 have a bipod option as well? I think I figured out what is going to be kept in my characters' getaway car
and Rome is about 16 miles from open water, so Destroyers could play a significant role, along with Carriers. Keeping Naval superiorty. The Destroyers and Battleships could easily hit Rome from a distance.
The Air Force, Unless Im Wrong. Cannot really do any that the Navy cant, as far as combat situations. The Navy carries Marines Cobras and Fighter Craft. with the exception of Large Bombers.
And what about Civilian Builders and the such?
.edit: Ooh, does that MK. 19 have a bipod option as well? I think I figured out what is going to be kept in my characters' getaway car
Well, apparently the Mk. 19 is on M2 Bradley APCs. Can it can be fitted with a bipod or not? I don't know, though it does at least hint that you can put it on a firmpoint.
Ooh, does that MK. 19 have a bipod option as well? I think I figured out what is going to be kept in my characters' getaway car
Ya, it does. hahah they are a real B!^#@ to take apart though, same with the damn 50.
we had a Cobra chin option of Vulcan20mm or the 7.62 & mk19 40 Combo
The navy doesnt need heavy bombers from a flattop, funny thing happens when your fighters can carry 6-18 500lb dumbbombs with a PIP sight.
The flattop doesnt need to power around using its reactor, it floats even when switched off. Steam is needed for the cats, but steam requires boing water, and it wouldnt be hard to get that done without the reactor.
Extended Range 5" navy shells can guide by gps & inertia (apache guidance) out to about 100km. Conventional thump out to 20km+ accurately, and 40km+ inaccurately. Use the inaccurate range for city bombardment, use the accurate range for hitting just the Palace & Senate. These are the small 5" guns on moden destroyers thet fire like 20round per minute. Yes, they have submunition shells.
Just park the ship 1mile offshore,
and let them throw their boats away trying to get close enough to do anything. Then shell the forces massed to repell invasion. Then, as the survivers flee, fire one cruismissile at Rome. They will appreciate the smoketrail heading toward Rome, and later learn that we hit rome from the sea.
But yeah, there want ant stipulation as to what modern forces we are limited to. Or even what roman forces are the opposition. Just vanilla soldiers, we will have a 100-150 to 1 kill rate while we had bullets.
That's a given. How about something like a Predator UAV or tilt-rotor UAV for scouting the battlefield?
easily done.
Even the WW2 Iowa was thumping them out 30+ miles unguided and fairly accurate.
But like I said, lobbing the longballs of dumbshells would be for just a barage of the city, use 155howitzers at 10miles for "surgical" building bashing.
This is of course just a destroyer with 5" guns, Cruisers would have had 6" - 8" guns if they hadnt pretty much all gone missiles.
If you picked a carrier task force, they could erase the entire roman empire one night, leaving just 70% pop with no infrastucture or leadership. Considering the high number of slaves in that pop, thats a bad thing for rome
If you picked a carrier task force, they could erase the entire roman empire one night, leaving just 70% pop with no infrastucture or leadership. Considering the high number of slaves in that pop, thats a bad thing for rome
This would be shortly followed by a Europe-wide famine and the collapse of agriculture. Roman infrastructure served a purpose.
Hopefully Rome would surrender, saving the Time Fabric as best as possible.
The ancients didn't have one in our terms, they had wooden boats, they feared the water, it was undependable outside of land view.
You don't need to expend ammunition: the wooden boats can be crushed by modern warships without damaging them. Thick steel, remember that.
They see huge ships, large fractions of a mile long, and made of good steel.
the romans couldn't make steel in quantity, not like that, the intimidation factor... would be held only in scientific notation.
WW2 had thick steel, now... not so much.
This would be shortly followed by a Europe-wide famine and the collapse of agriculture. Roman infrastructure served a purpose
But not to us. Europe-wide famine is who's problem?
I think we should get extra credit in this war for taking out all of europe along with Rome.
How can anyone spin that kind of devestation into the Modern Force not winning vs roman empire. We won & beyond, we'll kill them, their allies, and their enemies too.
Then sail over to Manhattan with $26 of beads and settle down.
the one thing that hasn't been touched on is navy, so lets go there.
The ancients didn't have one in our terms, they had wooden boats, they feared the water, it was undependable outside of land view.
You don't need to expend ammunition: the wooden boats can be crushed by modern warships without damaging them. Thick steel, remember that.
They see huge ships, large fractions of a mile long, and made of good steel.
the romans couldn't make steel in quantity, not like that, the intimidation factor... would be held only in scientific notation.
Which specific ships do you picture making up the...er... U.S. fleet?
The romans had a few big ships, but none of them were common, or that great.
A WW2 Battleship, that would be comical. Its armor is likely to be thick as a romans sword is long.
WW2 forces are the best to take on Rome. Say part of the Normandy invasion, a small one, gets lost in a storm and pops out in the ancient Mediterranean.
That would make a great story. One sided as hell, but it would be great to see the look on that first fisher man's face.
Throw in a few mines along the trade routes, and you've pretty much got the coast covered.
But not to us. Europe-wide famine is who's problem?
I think we should get extra credit in this war for taking out all of europe along with Rome.
How can anyone spin that kind of devestation into the Modern Force not winning vs roman empire. We won & beyond, we'll kill them, their allies, and their enemies too.
Then sail over to Manhattan with $26 of beads and settle down.
Round two. The US military command wants to capture Julius Caesar alive so they can learn from this great man.
Round one hundred. A plague, brought in by the US military's advanced microbes wipes out half of the Roman population.
Round one thousand. A new Roman Republic, based on the American Constitution, is founded and lasts for another thousand years (outlasting the original Roman Empire). The Americans, who interbreed with the Roman and are seduced by Roman vices, forget much of their technology with in a generation or two.
and are seduced by Roman vices
You need to spend more time in Vegas.
Americans were spending too much time watching TV and losing touch with reality, so we made Reality TV and never have to turn it off.
Roman troops were issued wine rations,
we sell cans of beer cheaper than bottled water. We have ubiquotus 80 & 100 proof liquor, as well as losing a war on recreational drugs. And maybe you've head of them things called cigarettes.
When we settle Rome v2.0 , the Hedonists will bask in our presense, for we are the corrupt lazy society they dream of. We have VICE beyond their comprehension.
Besides,
imagine the look on their faces when we tell them we are getting rid of their govenment and installng a Republic(democratic) with things we call Senators.
Round one hundred. A plague, brought in by the US military's advanced microbes wipes out half of the Roman population.
And which plague is this?
I see your Russell Crowe and raise you a pistol & sabre toting Patton (FTW)
Yeah, he'd be the US hero in such a conflict. Even when the enemy got within melee range he'd beat the living sh*t out of 'em..
Originally seen here.
So, who do you think would win?
Thats insane. US air power, cruise missiles, and straight up soldiers would dominate the roman army... this is a silly thought excersize.
So, who do you think would win?
Assuming both sides had access to complete logistics and a numerical disparity of no greater than 10:1... the US Army hands down.
An army reliant on densely packed formations of soldiers will be slaughtered in the face of modern artillery.
Heck, even against 20:1 odds the US Army might still win.
I feel that you all forget that the US has the ability and god-given right to retreat. Like people have said, the Roman would be completly useless until thier weapons were in range. And then the most fit, comparitively huge, practically unarmoured, low encumbered military would flee. And make the Romans look like idiots trying to keep up. And even assuming that they did engage in en masse melee, I have had first hand experience with USAF martial arts training. The Romans would know and understand the term SoL after the first shoulder lock. And I don't know if any of you have ever seen American Gladiator, but The Joust is a military training. The US makes vaguely staff like weapons and has the Romans at thier feet by size and technique.
The US military has melee as one of many things its soldiers have to learn.
The Roman military has melee as its only means of fighting.
If it comes down to melee (which it won't, if the US has any sense at all), my money would be on the Romans. Sure, the US trains in it, but so do the Romans. In fact, given a large lack of rifles and explosives in general, that's basically all the Roman military trains in.
hint: Romans know shoulder locks too.
I think the big advantage in melee combat for the Romans would be their swords... As for hand-to-hand (if somehow they were both disarmed), the larger combatants, who's melee training focuses primarily on this aspect of melee, would have the edge.
I doubt the Romans expected to do much unarmed fighting on the battle field. If you lost your sword, you dodged your enemy's until you could get it back. :P
You can dive for your gun if you've dropped it... Or you can switch to your sidearm, pop the guy who knocked your rifle out of your hands, and then pick your main armament back up.
I think the assumption here is not that the US troops ran out of ammo, but the Romans somehow got in close.
Many a vigorous young soldier attacked the training course I was on with such enthusiasm that the Instructors had a few set aside for "evaluation".
These guys coincidentally happen to be on the police call afterwards to help clean/repair parts of the course.
A soldier without bullets is Not toothless.
Spirit of the Bayonet: Quick and the Dead,
Doug
@ Hinthas: Agreed. By "evaluation", what do you mean exactly?
It doesn't take much to motivate a person to kill. (The world has problems with the US military logic of "Put a fist in it first, then see if we need explosives. Diplomacy? Amateurs." way of dealing with things.)
The fellas that are enacting this strategy do not. The SPIRIT OF THE BAYONET is something thats drilled into you at a very early point in a guy thats in a Combat Arms career field. The term is Violence of Action. Translated is probably Be the Bigger Dog.
What makes the grass grow? BLOOD, BLOOD, BLOOD!
Doug
Assuming both sides had access to complete logistics and a numerical disparity of no greater than 10:1... the US Army hands down.
An army reliant on densely packed formations of soldiers will be slaughtered in the face of modern artillery.
Heck, even against 20:1 odds the US Army might still win.
If we are counting fighting men boots on the ground
Heck, I'd go all the way to 200:1 and the US army wins hands down
It gets dicy around 500:1
Again 1 company of 150 men > 10 leigons (6000 fighting men and 50 seige weapons)
Heck the thee 60mm mortars that single rifle company has alone are going to break the first 5 legions that come marching that way. Roman legions tend to bolt when 1 in every 5 man is dead/disabled. Heck the company could make a very impressive pointy wall all aorund their encampment made up of the sword/javelins the fleeing romans left behind.
You start adding in 'support staff' numbers and you take away the problem of medical care and ammo shortages, but the number ratio starts to get all screwy
As i said before, there should be absolutely no questiton that a modern nation's military would absolutely and nearly instantanously annihilate the biggest and best pre-industrial revolution civilization's military.
Could a single US army MP with his M9 sidearm? Of course not. Could a single 'fireteam' no, but they'd cut such a huge bloody swath through the first legion or two that marched against them that it would be enshrined in history as Roman Empire vs Strange Demonmonsters
samurai of early 19th century Japan.
US military against a bunch of whiny bureaucrats who sometimes carried swords who's function was more decorative than functional? US military hands down.
NEXT!
United States military. Remember the end of The Last Samurai? Yeah, about in every team carries a gun that can spit out that much firepower. The rest carry guns that can't quite keep it up for long, but it still kicks the crap out of swords and arrows.
Close into melee range and then there might be a problem... maybe, but unlike D20Modern, in real life firing an auto in close combat doesn't provoke an AoO.
No contest.
---
For those that care, here is neamtzu_rau's latest post (December 23rd, 2008):
One thing I noticed was that the poster went from fighting a Roman Army to the entire Empire then eventually to the whole world. So which one is it?
It all started as a friendly " What IF ? " .
In the beggining, there was Cezar. He was just about to consolidate his winns in the Civil war, when out of nowhere , came a mechanized American Armoured Division.
His troops stared in disbelief.
"Shall we have a go, General?" his most trusty Decurion asked.
"Not yet, Quintus. Let us see what their intentions are."
One. U.S. Marines are not useless without our rifles, learning MCMMAP (Marine Corps Mix Martial Arts Program) is mandatory so we learn to use anything available to fight. Even if it comes down to it, we can disarm, take down, break an arm or two, and quickly kill someone with just our bare hands.
Tricks also well known by the Romans Legionaires.
So yes, a modern day Marine can survive quite easily.
For a short period of time.
We're talking decades of No-Gas Stations, No-Supply Depots, No Modern Comodities.
Just you, your comrades in Roman Age. Forever. See you adapt to that!
Three. One of the main factors that the Roman Army was so tough is because of their superior armor, but I can safely say that our armor is superior to theirs. Our flak and kevlar can stop/deflect rounds from a rifle, so the Romans would have had a hard time stabbing and shooting at us with their swords and arrows.
Indeed it is.
But in the long run, you cannot hope to wipe out the entire ancient world.
Killing your ancestors before you're even born, ultimately canceles your very existence on this earth. Ponder these factors in your campaign and you will not be so bold to think that Kicking Roman Ass around the Antiquity will proove usefull.
You've only create a void, as the Roman Empire is a shield against the Barbarian German Tribes and they somehow , protect you, from the rest of the world's population.
Sure, you can kill them all and still have bullets to spare.
I doubt you'd be able to take down millions of people just to win a war.
Sooner or later you'd turn to diplomacy. Thus you'd have to be on the Romans Good side, seeing how they're the Watchdog of the Ancient World.
Given just those 3 points, I would say that even if we did run out of supply we'd still be a tough nut to crack for the Romans.
Not that tough. Pinky soft, actually.
They'd outnumber you and throw arrows at you from a safe distance.
Those kevlar/flak vests don't defend your arms, legs and face.
You'd bleed slowly to death.
And then they'll come for the final kill.
United States military. Remember the end of The Last Samurai? Yeah, about in every team carries a gun that can spit out that much firepower. The rest carry guns that can't quite keep it up for long, but it still kicks the crap out of swords and arrows.
My historian side would like to tell you that The Last Samurai = a load of flaming crap on a stick. The only thing it got even remotely right is the fact samurai were abolished and then had a little rebellion that got stomped out.
But my other side still liked the movie. :P
Close into melee range and then there might be a problem...
Not even. The average modern infantryman would be better at hand to hand combat than any late-Edo samurai. US military are ACTUALLY warriors. Late-Edo samurai are a bunch of businessmen and politicians calling themselves "warriors" because thats what their ancestors used to be.
No contest.
Agreed.
In terms of tactics, was the Japanese army of that time sufficiently advanced above Rome?
Eh, if only because 200 years of peace made most of the "warriors" nothing but chubby bureaucrats stuffing swords into their belts.
You MIGHT have a contest if you were using 17th century samurai instead of 19th century.;)
The fact is: Despite what anime and pop-culture wants to keep pushing, samurai stopped being warriors after the battle of Sekigahara.
My historian side would like to tell you that The Last Samurai = a load of flaming crap on a stick. The only thing it got even remotely right is the fact samurai were abolished and then had a little rebellion that got stomped out.
But my other side still liked the movie. :P
I wasn't citing it for historical relevance, just a demonstration of what automatic weapons do to melee infantry. ;)
Not even. The average modern infantryman would be better at hand to hand combat than any late-Edo samurai. US military are ACTUALLY warriors. Late-Edo samurai are a bunch of businessmen and politicians calling themselves "warriors" because thats what their ancestors used to be.
Ah, see. I didn't know that. I trusted Ragitsu to give the US at least something to fight. :P
I kid. :P
I think the problem is that military technology and tactics have advanced quite far in the last century. We've learned from the stupidity and brilliance of past tacticians, and we have pioneered new tactics ourselves. With the ever advancing technology of modern day militaries, we can do things soldiers one-hundred years ago never dreamed of.
People can argue all they want, but really, I don't think there is a pre-20th century military that could win in a stand-up brawl with the United State's military, or any other competent military today.
Availability of supplies (due to being sent back in time), and the terrain (which can include the element of weather).
Is there anything else i'm missing?
In fact, given a large lack of rifles and explosives in general, that's basically all the Roman military trains in.
hint: Romans know shoulder locks too.
Absolute total BS
The Roman Legion knew very little about hand to hand combat. They didn't need to. The Roman Legion was famous for defeating foes that were pyhsically much larger and much more skilled at arms.
One vs One the average Gaul would kick the average Roman butt.
However, Romans learned to fight in formation. They actually didn't spend much time learning 'stabby stabby' they learned 'Wheel Right' and 'Turtle Formation with Slow Advance!' etc etc.
This meant the average Gaul charging horde once it got within melee range resulted in a ton of fights that consisted of 1 Gaul vs 3 Romans + 3 more romans behind that
That being said, their formations and weapons types were designed to be used against either loose groups of melee armed enemies or equally trained rigid formation.
None of the formations would mean squat against firearms...even at 10 yards or closer.
If the romans have room to hold a shield, the modern military is giong to have room to press the muzzle of the rifle to the body of the enemy and pull the trigger.
If we get to an absolute press of bodies soo tight that the rifle cannot be used effectively (think, fighting in a phonebooth)...then neither can the shield, phylum, or shortsword of the romans. At that point it is knife vs knife and more a matter of luck and raw strength than skill.
But as stated before, even a single marine company not even trying is going to send an entire legion running before they get within 500 yards of the marines.
IF the military tries, it can easily stay out of melee range
As far as food supply. Who cares. The modern military will be able to get all the food they need by taking it from the enemy. Enemy starves. Moderns win. This may be followed by 'Moderns starve too.' It will NOT be the case of Moderns starve before Romans are defeated
As I said before, this question is absolutely silly.
The only real aspect of this quesiton is 'how few modern troops would be necessary to defeat the Roman Empire?'
10?
50?
100?
500?
1000?
10?
50?
100?
500?
1000?
2 (per army)
Sniper and Spotter. Take out the chain of command, and from so far away that you cannot be seen.
Spot leader.
Solve math problem.
Fire.
Verify kill.
Relocate.
Repeat.
2 (per army)
Sniper and Spotter. Take out the chain of command, and from so far away that you cannot be seen.
Spot leader.
Solve math problem.
Fire.
Verify kill.
Relocate.
Repeat.
ALL WAYS REPEAT:P
Well, Master_Vega, in that case, any confrontation seems to boil down to two key factors:
Availability of supplies (due to being sent back in time), and the terrain (which can include the element of weather).
Is there anything else i'm missing?
Sorry I didn't reply earlier. Completely missed this.
I think the only thing missing is Morale, but then I'm not a soldier. I'm sure there are people here who could better answer your question.
And this.
are you saying that there were 20 billion people? its estimated in the year 0 there were only 150 million people alive, how many of those people could have been combatants?
I just dont see how this could have been argued for so long.
What Modern numbers, with how much organic suport, and how in the heck did they end up in that situation.
Back in my day,
it was a common joke that all our training was in scenarios where the slowmover aircraft were ours, and all zoomers were enemy.... just where did they think the US would be having boots on the ground without major air dominance?
So just how will there be a live ammo troop gathering without organic support:
The 5th Infantry Division mobilized with live loadout.... yet nobody noticed the div arty slept in that day and missed the move? Or we just decided to leave the army helicopters at home?
Without a standardized troop strength and support explanation,
we cant fathom the strategy or tactics of the modern force.
Is this a FiretTeam vs 20 legionaires, a reinforced MI company vs 4 Legions, or a Carrier Task Force against the entire empire.
1 MEU or MEB vs. The Roman Legions.
1 CSG vs. The Entire Roman Empire at it's Peak.
That would be three wins, and not for the Romans. The best way to compare is to compare like to like. The Roman Legions were full support forces, so you have to compare full support forces. A BCT or MEU are full support forces, and a CSG is a mobile air force, artillery, and supply depot.
1. The M1A1 Abram tanks will find themselves blocked, yes, blocked by the roman limes. Caesar's ditches will slow the american advance to a hault.
i have no idea how ceasar hopes to dig a trench deep / wide enough to stop an MTB fast enought to affect the advance of tanks
solution one - stop , retreat , flank
solution two - uses tanks mine ploughs or engineers to ` fill in the trench ` and continue
2. Then , by deploying his hipaspides closer to the blocked tanks, Caesar can start taking them out one by one, using tar and greek-fire.
solution one - the accompaning ifantry just mow them down
solution two - reverse and drive over the idiots
solution three - use co ax / commanders machine guns
3. Further use of flaming arows against the 101 Airborne Division marines will prove itself of greater importance on a flat terrain, where the marines will find virtually no cover, ending up beeing pinned down by a halle of arrows.
solution one - archers max range < 250m , GPMG [ M240G ] max range 1000m [ to effectivly engage infantry ] - ceasars archers are dead as son as ` contact ` is made
4. To counter the enemy's mortar and heavy artilery, Caesar would sent his Heavy Cavarly upon them, slashing their crews in an instant.
solution one - the apache gunships he claims are ` useless ` can provide overwatch fpr the artillery and weapons coy
solution two - there are thier personal weapons ?? - at the sight of approaching cavalry - weps coy abandon the motarts , take to thier slit trences and proceed with the turkey shoot
5. Apache helicopters watching the area will find it dificult to take out their targets, due to the fact that the battle is already engaged by romans and the americans soldiers are virtually fighting close combat, in wich the legionaries will prevail, sooner or later.
solution one - hit them on the approach / as they form up - medieval armies - even highly efficient ones like cearars legion could not just deploy / engage in an instant
solution two - seek and destroy - the apacheses will just bimble off and find ceasars baggage train / camp / reserves - and kill & derstroy everything not committed to CQB
6. With the machinegun bunkers of the American Army, Caesar can only sit back and enjoy the show as his balistae and catapults blast the entranchments apart
solution one - aphache gunships turn on ceasars seige engines
solution two - if you can hit us - we can hit you i dunno what the exact ranges are of all the medieval seige engines ceasar had at ihs disposal are
but at platoon level - we will reply with GPMG [ 1000M ] LAW80 [
at coy level -M2HB 2000M anf MILAN [ 2500M ]
the guy is living in a fantasy land - that requires that the supposed US side are total imbiciles who abandon all tactics , while giving ceasar neer omnicient foresight and tactics
ROFLMAO - absolutly freaking hilarious
the guy is living in a fantasy land - that requires that the supposed US side are total imbiciles who abandon all tactics , while giving ceasar neer omnicient foresight and tactics
If we are to assume the American forces do that, and Caesar has perfect tacintel, and that no more than 1000 US combatants (mixed force of land-based troops) are present, then we can probably call it an even fight :D
ROFLMAO - absolutly freaking hilarious
the guy is living in a fantasy land - that requires that the supposed US side are total imbiciles who abandon all tactics , while giving ceasar neer omnicient foresight and tactics
Either he's nuts, or a really really convincing troll.
Still, the scenario is interesting if properly set up with a few "balancing" factors in mind.
Why not just drop a nuke on the roman army? Its not like they have nukes of their own... there is no mutually assured destruction in this scenario. :P
/thread
There's still the little issue of potentially FUBARing the future by messing with the timeline.
Timeline? This is no time to talk about time. We don't have the time!...
Who other than the Army Corps of Engineers
could teach the romans how to do Aqueducts?
What, like thye figured that out by themselves?
And Concrete?
It is almost proof that we have already gone back and gave them the tech
You've already done what you are going to do, so just do whatever.
We're running out of time!
You heard it here first people. The plot to Season 14 of 24. Jack Bauer has to stop terrorists from tricking an Armored Division from going back in time and wiping out Rome, thus destroying Western Civilization.
Still, the scenario is interesting if properly set up with a few "balancing" factors in mind.
hey - i am not diss-ing the concept , just the way the " person " did it - with such a blatantly ` stacked deck `
BTW - what ` balancing factors ` do you have in mind ??
because i see only 2 valid ` balancing factors `
1 - psychological ` break down ` of various types reducing combat efficiency
2 - managing finite IRRIPLACABLE recources
and lastly - if any one is interested - i would certainly be up for a RP / wargame simulation of the issue
the Us would **** Rome hell it wouldn't even be a fight. Fish in a barrel.
can we move the "argument " on please ?
the delusion that a medieval force could prevail angainst any modern force - has been addressed
the only thing of interest is [ IMHO at least ] what is the MINIMUM force size required to survive long term with no resupply
and how would you do it - ` take over ` rome - and set yourselves up as gods ? force a truce and create a manageable enclave ? other ideas ?
having division sized units with tanks heavy artillery and air assets is just munchkin madness
the real test is see how far you get with < 1000 men - thats where you have to make descisions - not just rely on brute force and stupidity
winning the first battle or even the second or 3rd is easy - but historically rome did not stop EVAR - hanibal inflicted defeat after defeat - but was eventually ground down - 1st because carthage did not send him reinforcements / supplies , second because rome kept sending armies and was in no danger of running out
so how do you stop rome ?
They appreciated the power of allegiance. You cut a deal with Rome. Of course, the negotiations will take place after a show of strength on our part.... like shelling Rome with a little 8" arty or dropping negotiations from a loitering Drone at 1000'. Rome will quickly appreciate that we should be working with them rather than against them.
Even a smaller force can tell Rome to have a civilized war:
One village will be the war.
In 5 days we will try to raze the town center of that village, and Roman forces are to try to defend it. If we cant raze it by the end of the week, we will have to surrender.
Of course, it is not our fault that Rome will think we will be running in or lobbing seige from a few hundred yards.... where as we will be lobbing some shells from a few thousand yards out or just one drone bombs it without the Romans ever seeing any of our troops.
Rome is not stupid, nor do they like to spend a lot.
We can setup an alliance after just one very public attack.... such as blowing up the Rome Senate from a loitering airborne asset. Lets invite some of their scouts into our camp... show them some DVD movies & how even lowly infantry have pocket music boxes and the power of cell phone cameras. Let their scouts take back a diplomatic message as a vid on cellphone and discuss it over that phone
I don't know about selling them guns though. I mean, in the not so distant past America trained a middle eastern fighting force and sold them a ton of weapons. Last I remember, America is now at war with that fighting force, and that fighting force has taking down two (actually three, since there were three buildings that fell) of America's icons of power.
That sounds more like subtle intimidation.
Perhaps a 4e style skill challenge composed primarily of Intimidation and Diplomacy skill checks? :P
Army commanders are familiar with ancient warfare, ancient weapons and the progression of military dominance. The roman phalanx and roman tactics ended its dominance with the introduction of the longbow. Not only can our army revert to older forms of warfare, any advance the Romans and the ancient world can come up with to compensate is still ancient history. Even should the world hold out until our army runs out of gas and bullets, we will still have kevlar armor (and plate if need be), the stirrup and mounted calvary, gun powder and bullets (run through refitted rifle barrels) and the enemy's play book for he next 2000 years.
It seems silly to think this fanboy discussion has gone on so long, but such is the case with hypotheticals. I guess we do it because its fun and exercises the mind in nonproductive ways, like running on a treadmill - you don't get anywhere but are tired of it none-the-less.
longbow
appologies for the one word quote - with no context
BUT the romans were masters of ` monkey see , monkey do ` adaption
if they capture an M16 - the only real consequence is that you no longer have use of it
but a captured longbow - that can be reverse engineered in days - and be in production in weeks
and the romans can feild more archers than you
same with any other ` new approach ` - like the swiss pike phalanx
rome can copy it VERY quckly and feild more of them
The only real advantage the moderns would have is knowledge that these already have existed and are theoretically possible. The actual techniques for making plate body armour are quite involved, and it's unlikely that the moderns' machine shops have blueprints for them, and certainly they don't have any modern tools that could churn them out using anything more advanced than handcrafting. It can be done, but not all that fast, and there will be a significant learning curve to recover the "obsolete" technology. I expect there would be similar issues with most such technology, unless the commander happens to luck out with a SCA geek in his machien shop corps.
Alternatively, the Americans can rely on their lack of any sense of fair play. Pick off any competent Roman generals, wage guerilla warfare, never enter hand-to-hand combat. The same tactics that served us well in the Revolution.
In the long term, an American military unit stranded in Ancient Rome could simply hide long enough to learn to use bows, and possibly build crude gunpowder rockets or bombs. Trial-and-error would produce effective longbows, which restores the American range advantage, and gives them armor-piercing capabilities. Even crude unguided rockets could wreak havoc on Roman phalanxes.
is not telling your adversaries that you have limited ammo.
Shock and awe them,
pick off some generals and pop some "Watch this" buildings
run over a town with 1 tank, then invite roman scouts to see the motor pool
give them a cellphone with a video greeting to take back to the senate.
and then ask the romans if they want us working For them or Against them.
heck, our Seige can outrun their Cavalry
(oh man, imagine a m109 chasing some light cav back toward rome ;) )
I'm not so sure a modern army would be able to field gunpowder weapons or longb ows, plate armour, or any of the other intermediate historical equipment. Not quiickly and efficiently, anyhow.
The only real advantage the moderns would have is knowledge that these already have existed and are theoretically possible. The actual techniques for making plate body armour are quite involved, and it's unlikely that the moderns' machine shops have blueprints for them, and certainly they don't have any modern tools that could churn them out using anything more advanced than handcrafting. It can be done, but not all that fast, and there will be a significant learning curve to recover the "obsolete" technology. I expect there would be similar issues with most such technology, unless the commander happens to luck out with a SCA geek in his machien shop corps.
I really have to disagree with this. Ancient wars were fought in seasons while modern ones are fought in weeks. It would take a year or more for major forces to move from one region to another. They move at the speed of walk and cannot move at all during certain times of the year. And the tools used to perform field and base repairs is more than enough to produce nearly anything, especially more tools. While it may take some time for a field mechanic to figure out how to reproduce an english yew longbow, its a shorter leap to a compound bow from cable and pulleys (something that roman obervers still could not replicate). And you would be surprised just how many soldiers play D&D and / or are SCA members. You also forget that archery, horseback riding and games like polo are still practiced by our people today.
I do agree on the time to produce full plate from scratch, but starting out with kevlar armor and just fashioning replacement plate inserts and shields from recycled steel is far easier. Arrows won't penetrate what stops small arms fire.
the choke point is the PRIMERS.
Sulfer & Guano powder is easy, MercFulm is easy, safe primers are hard
any army mechanic can tell you the easiest way to make a Yew Bow is to use the leaf springs from a Duece in a crossbow instead. Which will start a 2 hr debate among the mechanics, which will end in SteamRotaryAC, GaussFlinger, and isopropyl artilery conversion plans.
Electrolysis will yeild hydrogen and oxygen, and from there the scores can really change: the romans might find out why the verb form of Hindenburg is bad- We Hindenburged them boys good.
Arrows won't penetrate what stops small arms fire.
Can someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought arrows DO penetrate vests that stop small arms fire...
I really have to disagree with this. Ancient wars were fought in seasons while modern ones are fought in weeks. It would take a year or more for major forces to move from one region to another. They move at the speed of walk and cannot move at all during certain times of the year.
I have no idea why you mention this. While fascinating, I don't see how travel times are relevant to a discussion of reinventing the longbow.
And the tools used to perform field and base repairs is more than enough to produce nearly anything, especially more tools. While it may take some time for a field mechanic to figure out how to reproduce an english yew longbow, its a shorter leap to a compound bow from cable and pulleys (something that roman obervers still could not replicate).
The Romans had already invented, or had access to, all the relevant technology to make a compound bow. They had bows, wheels, and pulleys already. The only issues were miniaturisation (all their pulleys were for construction rather than personal tools), and concept. Once they had a captured example, reverse-engineering it would be trivial for them.
And you would be surprised just how many soldiers play D&D and / or are SCA members. You also forget that archery, horseback riding and games like polo are still practiced by our people today.
It's one thing to be a SCA member and play at medievals every weekend. It's another to actually make reliable medieval weaponry yourself. Every SCA member I ever met bought his gear by mail order or at a society meeting.
I do agree on the time to produce full plate from scratch, but starting out with kevlar armor and just fashioning replacement plate inserts and shields from recycled steel is far easier. Arrows won't penetrate what stops small arms fire.
A medieval longbow could pin an armoured mounted knight to his horse, piercing leg plate TWICE, plus the leg, plus a good depth of horse. The average modern personal firearm isn't a huge amount more powerful than medieval longbows, because they don't need to be; they kill just as effectively beyond a certain level of power.
Romans routinely had breastplate armour, and it wouldn't be hard for them to expand that to arm and leg armour, had there been a need.
Of course, an efficiently-run modern campaign will flatten the Roman army before reverse-engineered or easily-accomplished Roman innovations could be rolled out.
But equally, an efficiently-run modern campaign will win long before recreating old tech can be done in sufficient quantities to be useful. If the campaign drags to the extent that such reinventing will be useful, I think it is fair to say that supply will be a significant problem. Exactly how supply would be an issue would depend so much on precise strategies that it would b e difficult to comment.
Can someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought arrows DO penetrate vests that stop small arms fire...
Modern personal body armor is graded by 3 NIJ ratings: Balistic, Stab, and Spike
Commonly refered to Guard Armor, high Stab & Spike armor with medium, low, or no balistic grades are readily availible for prison guards... seems they are of the thought that they wont be shot at a lot inside the prison
I have no idea why you mention this. While fascinating, I don't see how travel times are relevant to a discussion of reinventing the longbow.
Because by the time we run out of ammo we would have depleted all forces in the region. By the time they can bring new forces to bear, a year would have passed.
The Romans had already invented, or had access to, all the relevant technology to make a compound bow. They had bows, wheels, and pulleys already. The only issues were miniaturisation (all their pulleys were for construction rather than personal tools), and concept. Once they had a captured example, reverse-engineering it would be trivial for them.
They used wood for pulleys and never had the metallurgy to produce the kind of alloys that would make a compound bow work.
It's one thing to be a SCA member and play at medievals every weekend. It's another to actually make reliable medieval weaponry yourself. Every SCA member I ever met bought his gear by mail order or at a society meeting.
Hey, its you who brought up the SCA angle, not me.
A medieval longbow could pin an armoured mounted knight to his horse, piercing leg plate TWICE, plus the leg, plus a good depth of horse. The average modern personal firearm isn't a huge amount more powerful than medieval longbows, because they don't need to be; they kill just as effectively beyond a certain level of power.
Romans routinely had breastplate armour, and it wouldn't be hard for them to expand that to arm and leg armour, had there been a need.
Of course, an efficiently-run modern campaign will flatten the Roman army before reverse-engineered or easily-accomplished Roman innovations could be rolled out.
But equally, an efficiently-run modern campaign will win long before recreating old tech can be done in sufficient quantities to be useful. If the campaign drags to the extent that such reinventing will be useful, I think it is fair to say that supply will be a significant problem. Exactly how supply would be an issue would depend so much on precise strategies that it would b e difficult to comment.
Sure its all in the logistics. My point is simply that modern army forces would simply have a massive advantage to begin with, and a head start on every contingency.
but a captured longbow - that can be reverse engineered in days - and be in production in weeks
Longbow?
Most soldier body armor is better against ballistic than anything piercing, like a knife
However, even without published Stab & Spike ratings,
Steel/Ceramic/T6 inserts are still as stab resistant as a steel armor plate.
Take a Kbar to the bottom of an Iron Skillet if you need first hand experience of Knife Vs Steel Vest Insert.
Longbow?
ROFLMAO - no
i meant the welsh longbow like that ^
look at the exchange between penchant and myself
basically - he is of the opinion that a modern force would maintain thier superiourity AFTER all ammo / ordinance was expended by adopting weapons and tactic from latter centuries like longbows etc
thus my counterpint that -the romans would easily copy the longbow - and feild a bigger and better archer force - as they have more craftsmen , more soldiers etc
i hope that clarifies it
Hand to hand against armored romans is a lot easier when your wielding a TazerStick instead of a blade: Tag, your it.
One mustnt overlook the importance of maintaining not just a technology lead, but a major technology gap that they cant cross with capturing a few weapons for dissection. If we "invent" the longbow, they will have it too by the end of the week. If we "invent" gunpowder factories, they will still be going "Huh?", and those roman copycat factories will have a nasty habit of taking an artillery barrage of just 3 shells on that one building.
We would have the advantage of range and siege,
so we can develop our infrastructure while they have to keep rebuilding any forges or factories that we shell.... its hard to do R&D when the lab & wisemen keep blowing up.
The romans understand the value of Siege equipment.
We have seige that is several orders of magnitude greater than anything in their world.
Romans understand the principles of allegiance and empire building, mercenary forces and vassaled troops are nothing new to them.
We simply allow Rome to take us into the empire, and our tithe to the empire is Seige Sevices. When there is a campaign, rome can have us at the back of their column pulled by draft oxen.
Of course, it will play merry heck with the roman infantry moral
having to walk all that way and when they are still 2-3 days out we scrub the target city with artillery... poor infantry will have nobody left to fight.
Herr Baron, the roman column has entered the forest... they will be at our gates in a week
Uh, it appears Seer, they are killing us from a week away, and it will take a week for us to get there to stop them
Ok. So you claim you have scads of these Roman troops...the entire empire to field.
I'm sorry but please point out a historical moment when Rome was able to field its entire standing army covering the entire empire in any sort of combined arms battle..ever. Well it never happened. Why not? Because there is no way to feed that many troops. Not to mention that after your army reaches a certain size that they are going to run out of water.
Here's one very simple way the modern military wins in a hypothetical battle with no victory locations to hold etc...etc.. i.e. in fantasy land.
Modern army uses drone or satelight intelligence to watch your roman army advance...shells it enough to keep it disorganized and slow and generally demoralized and then just drives away. In an hour the modern army can simply drive off a distance it would take the romans an entire day or even two days to cover.
Let the romans start to get organized for the big battle...it takes time to get those troops out of march organization and geared up for a fight..drawn into position. The modern guys shell them some more...heck....the modern army could easily turn around at any point and reach the romans before they could organize from marching formations into combat formations....blow their ranks to pieces and then just casually drive off again.
All the modern army needs to do is blow the crap out of the baggage train used to supply this massive roman army and then keep them harassed and busy until their water runs out.
Also you've totally left out all kinds of stuff...like how about this.
Roman army approaches....modern army lays down a large smoke screen....not even a artillery barrage....a simple smoke screen (using the white phospherus smoke we happen to use in our smoke screens...) and watches that cloud of 300 degree gas waft over the roman units so it can burn all of the flesh off their bones.
Heck...you could create total havoc shooting tear gas and smoke rounds in the roman army before you drove close and totally obliterated them with machine gun fire.
In the end its all about mobility, flexability, sheer firepower and supply and you'd have to field such an ungodly force of romans to even hope to worry the modern army that all the modern guys would have to do is harrass...drive off...smoke screen trick...drive off...shell...drive off...turn around and assault at night..drive off and in three or four days the romans would be out of water and food and ready to surrender.
..... what, our boys go back with no pants or guns or satalites?
Is this time throw gonna rip the fillings out of out troops teeth too?
Why does it have to be our boys who went back? Who says the Romans can't get sent forward?
True, some form of temporal distortion that happens during a joint military training maneuvers in the nevada desert or maybe send a group of soldiers from an allied country that disappears and the government requests American intervention... they show up at the site and the Romans appear.
One can only assume whatever brought the modern military back also brought their equipment back with them
..... what, our boys go back with no pants or guns or satalites?
Is this time throw gonna rip the fillings out of out troops teeth too?
I didn't know satellites were standard issue gear for a trooper's rucksack :P.
If you bring the Romans to modern times, that unbalances the fight even more than it already is.
The entire thread is, essentially, "lets see how much we can skew the odds one way or another with completely random situational conditions until we come up with a good enough excuse to justify the result we want," so it doesn't matter.
The entire thread is, essentially, "lets see how much we can skew the odds one way or another with completely random situational conditions until we come up with a good enough excuse to justify the result we want," so it doesn't matter.
So it's a Marvel character vs DC character discussion then, huh?
Mostly for the type of troops, and number, plus their standard loadout. Then, vehicles and armaments. Finally, some sort of supply line.
or is it Modern Troops vs Roman Troops?
Cause if the aliens on Gleise581 pull XXXX Modern Heavy Infantry and YYYY Roman Infantry,
we can pretty much have to say YYYY had better be 20x or 40x XXXX if they start more than 100m apart
the 82nd airborne with all of its gear and personal
NOW GO FORTH AND ARGUE:P
I have not read the entire 10 or so pages leading up to this, but one thing that I have not seen leading up to this is the studies performed by David Grossman regarding the lethality of combat and soldier's predisposition against killing. This would suggest that the training of the US soldier's would better counter this, and make them more lethal, and much more capable of inflicting deadly injuries regardless of the weapon type.
I can't believe that I have gotten into this.
One might assume the Modern forces would prefer to not fight.
However, if the Romans press a fight,
it is easier to stop folks from killing you
than to get told to Go kill those retreating guys
What if John Rambo where with the modern boys?
Lets throw in more random situational crap:
What if John Rambo where with the modern boys?
In that case, can the Romans have Spartacus? :D
In that case, can the Romans have Spartacus? :D
No.
Well...
Maybe...
Ok, yes.
wouldnt he join the Modern side to fight the romans?
If the romans did have Sparticus,
wouldnt he join the Modern side to fight the romans?
Yes, exactly ;)
like I said earlier, we should get Patton
Shoot a tankgun, no problem, he's got a 20BAB.
But what is he like outside his tank? 20BAB with a 45colt (re: olympics)
Ouch.... well, if he runs out of ammo? 20BAB Saber (re: Army Master)
What about washed up on the shore of a desert isle? 20BAB FaceSlapper (fav enemy Coward)
Like a 10Str/10MA Marksman,
when Patton runs out of ammo he actually becomes MORE dangerous
Can't he just throw bullets with his hands?
unless he runs out of bullet,then i guess he could just throw his gun at you
and we all know the real +20BAB uberism and its Chuck Norris:P
cause to roll a ToHit implies the possibility of missing,
and Chuck doesnt miss.... he announces his attack and goes straight to Damage dice
;).I frequently got in trouble for calling a cadence on our runs:
[INDENT]Herpes, AIDS, who knows whats next
Surgeon General says Practice Safe Sex
Wrap that rascal when you go downtown
Lord only knows whats bein' passes around[/INDENT]
Now, I know the Romans had a swell health care system of leeches & sacrifices to the gods for this kind of thing, but the Modern guys have a more viable latex method to reduce it occurring in the first place.
But again, that is for some reason assuming there is some long term campaign of combat.... which every doctrine of Modern tactics would end up avoiding. The entire campaign will be over in less than a week... likely in just 2 days.
The US dropped a bomb on Japan, a force of devastation beyond the scope of imagination of the target nation. We wanted them to surrender, they didnt. 3 days later we did it again. Amazingly they gathered up a surrender in no time flat.
How would the Romans be any different?
The US dropped a bomb on Japan, a force of devastation beyond the scope of imagination of the target nation.
The bombing of Tokyo was vastly more devastating than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. What was notable about the bombings was they were single atomic bombs, as opposed to thousands upon thousands of conventional and incidentary bombs.
We wanted them to surrender, they didnt. 3 days later we did it again. Amazingly they gathered up a surrender in no time flat.
Actually no, they still didn't surrender after the second bomb. They still himmed and hawed, then Russia declared war on them, then they surrendered.
1st - Leader:
M16A3/A4 with A M203 Grenade launcher, 3-4 reloads
2nd - Support:
M243 SAW (or Old school have the M60), a 200 round selective fire squad based machine gun
3rd - Communications
M16A3/A4
4th - Standard Rifle man/Ammo Carrier
M16A3/A4 with 3/4 more clips for each weapon in the squad.
Right there you have
270 5.56mm Rounds for each M16 without extra from the last dude on there
600 5.56mm Rounds for the M243
4 40mm Grenades
then Back up ammo
same number up top
= 1740 5.56 Rounds for each 4 man team
and 8 40mm Grenades
That's not counting Frag grenades, the M9 and that ammo.
And remember there's always cruse missle
and as i quote the Air Force Unofficial Sayings
Air Force
1. Cluster bombing from B-52s is very, very accurate. The bombs always hit the ground.
2. It is generally inadvisable to eject directly over the area you just bombed.
3. Who cares if a laser-guided 500-pound bomb is accurate to within 9 feet?
And one more thing to put into aspect, roman horses never have heard a gunshot before, have any of you fired a gun around a horse not trained to hear it? they freak out, they've bucked my uncle (a professional cowboy) off him from hearing a .30-06 go off. Now imagine them getting near Artillery?
;).
*coughvotecough*
;).
didn't you get the memo..that what i say is the law?;)
fine here are the choices...
1) 82nd airborne division with all supporting things
2) 101st with full support and all personal
3)The big red one
4) all of special operations command
The options should include the type of troops, their standard gear, the air vehicles, the ground vehicles and any artillery, for starters.
whine whine whine THERES JUST NO PLEASING YOU PEOPLE IS THERE?:P
?"You people"? What do you mean by "you people"
the d20 modern community... which i'm a part of..so i know
"VS" threads are stupid. It just boils down to whichever fanboy of one side can out-BS the other.
fun ruiner:P
fun ruiner:P
.
.
.
.
And the scenario of the rest would come and attack once the romans fell that would not be true, many of the civilizations around the romans were oppressed and the soldiers would be considered Heroes, if not gods.
Surely there would be those enlightened enough to consider the possibility of soldiers using technology, rather than possessing god-like powers?
1. Snipers just shoot and shoot and shoot untill there's no bullets
2. Tanks take out buildings and large groups of soilders
3. When they get close MG fire opens up, and by close I mean close for a MG, not a bow and arrow.
4. Airstrike and strafe the heck out of everything with the jets.
5. Repeat.
6. ???
7. PROFIT!
And I think i remembered this if not, 300 Spanish soldiers armed with swords and a few muskets killed over (I believe) 10,000 Aztecs, swords and a few muskets, the technology barrier makes it very difficult to have the roman win, its nearly impossible.
Nope, I've study the roman culture alot, both in high school, (amazing latin teacher) and few classical history classes, they still though if you cut open a cow or sheep you could tell the future. Augers would foretell a battle by signs of birds and the entrails of said animals. Heck their idea of medicine was so basic if they met the Native Americans and they gave them the root of the tree that original was used for aspirin, they'd hardly believe it. Another thing is that our weapons produce fear, a 5.56 firing isn't a friendly sound, imagine a M243 SAW or M60 going off it'll scare them into not asking questions, if you would point an M9 and shoot someone you didn't like they'd think you were an magician or spell caster, for you could produce from fire from a metal hammer and it caused someone to die, even their highest scientists would have a hard time understanding how firearms do what they do, let alone explain how they work. Misunderstood technology means magic or godly powers, not to sound too sci-fi, but the stargate movie is a great example to what would happen (even if its a fiction movie they told the actors how to act like they were basic humans). And remember their kind of technology is balistas and catapults, making that small enough to handle with two hands is way out of their league let alone try translating that, have fun.
And I think i remembered this if not, 300 Spanish soldiers armed with swords and a few muskets killed over (I believe) 10,000 Aztecs, swords and a few muskets, the technology barrier makes it very difficult to have the roman win, its nearly impossible.
So many assumptions
Yes, their auguries weren't grounded in science. Beef, maybe, but not science.
And their medical knowledge was a bit poor, to say the least. They had essentially no ability to cure disease, and no useful pharmaceutical knowledge, beyond opium as a painkiller. But they knew enough to prevent disease, and their surgery knowledge wouldn't be beaten until the mid-19th century (who would've thought sterilising surgical tools would be a good idea!) As for that aspirin thing, they may well not have known it, but their hospitals and doctors were such that they would have been willing to study it and accept it as something that works. They lacked initiative in searching for new drugs; they didn't lack intelligence in appreciating the practical effects of a drug once they had access to it.
Now, yes, modern weapons produce fear. Guess what? Modern man has been trained to react in certain ways to modern weapons, as a result of popular culture and our mass media. Romans have had no such training. And Stargate isn't so fair a portrayal of how ancient people might react; it is merely yet another part of our modern inculturation into how people should react.
No one knows for sure how Romans would have reacted. I'm sure they would be startled by the noise, but not as much as Hollywood might depict. Real guns don't actually sound like Hollywood guns. Indoors, it's a different story, because the walls of modern buildings act to create an echo chamber effect.
Hollywood gun sound effects are designed to frighten/startle. Real guns, fired outdoors, unless you are in close proximity, you might not even do much more than think "what's that noise", then carry on. I know I did when I accidentally trespassed on Chequers without realising what it was. Remember, these are guns, not wands of cause fear.
They certainly wouldn't think you are some kind of magician. To Romans, magic involved divination, prophecy, transmutation, and various forms of mind control of the suggestion spell level of intensity. Not fireballs. He might well think you a dangerous warrior, but it would not be magic as the average Roman would have understood the word. AD&D 2E's Romans supplement went as far as to severely curtail what spells the wizard class had access too, in recognition of this cultural concept of what magic is supposed to be.
Yes, Roman technology was all about ballistas and catapults for their big guns. But, um, a ballista is nothing more than a big crossbow, and the Romans were familiar with hand-held crossbows. They were in use in Europe from the 5th century BC, after all. It should come as no surprise to learn that Romans were also familiar with slings and archery too. You're right that these are out-ranged by modern sniper rifles; just about anything hand-held is (and even Roman artillery is). But the useful range of a decent bow is comparable to a typical firearm. I've seen good archers hit a 2-inch wide target consistently (95%+) at a range of 60 metres. Hitting a man-sized target reliably at three times that distance seems quite realistic, and swap the tournament, or "safety" arrowheads in modern use for one designed to cause injuries, and the wound can be just as nasty as anything a bullet will do. (As the Traveller game noted, a musket is no PGMP, but it'll still kill you if aimed right).
As for the conquistadores thing and mesoamerica, they were helped to a great extent by the locals having a religious prophecy that predicted their appearance. Sheer coincidence really. The Romans have no such prophecies. They were also able to manipulate the local political situation to their advantage (Corties often fought battles with local allies - he wasn't stupid), thanks to the aztec habit of demanding human sacrifices from their subjugated foes. This would be rather harder to exploit in Rome, because all the romans asked for was essentially trade goods, and occasionally soldiers ("auxiliaries") for mutual defence. In other words, the Romans did things so their subjugated peoples genuinely believed it was good to be a subject people. The Aztecs didn't. Completely different political dynamic. One is ridiculously easy to exploit; the other isn't.
Yes, Roman technology was all about ballistas and catapults for their big guns. But, um, a ballista is nothing more than a big crossbow, and the Romans were familiar with hand-held crossbows. They were in use in Europe from the 5th century BC, after all. It should come as no surprise to learn that Romans were also familiar with slings and archery too. You're right that these are out-ranged by modern sniper rifles; just about anything hand-held is (and even Roman artillery is). But the useful range of a decent bow is comparable to a typical firearm. I've seen good archers hit a 2-inch wide target consistently (95%+) at a range of 60 metres. Hitting a man-sized target reliably at three times that distance seems quite realistic, and swap the tournament, or "safety" arrowheads in modern use for one designed to cause injuries, and the wound can be just as nasty as anything a bullet will do. (As the Traveller game noted, a musket is no PGMP, but it'll still kill you if aimed right).
Whoa, slow down there. Swap that target out for a moving skirmisher in a combat situation, where accuracy goes down for any number of reasons, and when an arrow has a comparatively slow traveling speed when related to - say - a rifle round.
The US armed forces are trained to fire in those situations, and fire accurately. I doubt Roman archers had the same level of training simply by how many there were and how long it would take to hone their accuracy that much. The US military also uses camouflage and probably wouldn't fight the Roman army in the open as it's a stupid idea. Why reveal yourself to your enemy when you can fire from cover and, since they aren't used to modern guns, they won't immediately realize what's going on or how to locate it. :P Hell, why are you even attacking them when they're in formation? Ambush the bastards at night and then vanish. If it won't make them scared, it'll make them angry at "those cowards"... and an angry soldier is far from an ideal soldier.
If you really want a show of force in daylight, why are you even deploying your infantry? Get your flying machines and/or horseless vehicles on the field to wreak some havoc and draw attention.
As for the conquistadores thing and mesoamerica, they were helped to a great extent by the locals having a religious prophecy that predicted their appearance. Sheer coincidence really. The Romans have no such prophecies. They were also able to manipulate the local political situation to their advantage (Corties often fought battles with local allies - he wasn't stupid), thanks to the aztec habit of demanding human sacrifices from their subjugated foes. This would be rather harder to exploit in Rome, because all the romans asked for was essentially trade goods, and occasionally soldiers ("auxiliaries") for mutual defence. In other words, the Romans did things so their subjugated peoples genuinely believed it was good to be a subject people. The Aztecs didn't. Completely different political dynamic. One is ridiculously easy to exploit; the other isn't.
But it's not invincible. I'm certain military negotiators would come up with something even if we can't.
First, the "fog of war" issues you mention (mobile targets, incoming fire, etc) apply equally whether you are armed with a modern rifle, a PGMP, or a shortbow.
It's true that the velocity of a typical arrow will be about 270 fps (about 180 mph), which does not compare favourably with even a mundane pistol round at 1800 fps. But I would say that this velocity issue is not relevant. Unless you are in a motor vehicle, you aren't going to be moving fast enough to make any meaningful difference in accuracy (even then, motor vehicles are large enough and their movements typically predictable enough that a hit would not be too hard, provided it stays in range, main issue would be penetrating armour in this case). Remember, archers were routinely used to using their arrows to hunt, not just to shoot military targets.
It's also true that as a consequence of the lower velocity, archers have to aim high ("arch") their shots. Any experienced archer does this without thinking about it, and it does not make the weapon any trickier to use.
Archers in a Roman army would have been exclusively auxiliaries, recruited from non-Roman citizens. As such, the training regimen would have been very different. Much less focus on military drill, and much more focus on personal prowess. They would certainly be used to aiming at running animals, and by extension, running humans. And if you are used to hunting wild animals, you are, almost as a natural consequence, used to spotting hidden or camouflaged targets.
http://www.martinarchery.com/faq/facts.php
Unless of course, you have friends who can run at over 180 mph?
None of this, of course, invalidates the fact that, given free reign to choose your modern force and a decently large supply line, the moderns will win without breaking a sweat. I'm just pointy out that the Romans aren't oogabooga types who will bow down in worship at the mighty sorcerers once they see a rifle being fired.
Now, yes, modern weapons produce fear. Guess what? Modern man has been trained to react in certain ways to modern weapons, as a result of popular culture and our mass media. Romans have had no such training. And Stargate isn't so fair a portrayal of how ancient people might react; it is merely yet another part of our modern inculturation into how people should react.
No one knows for sure how Romans would have reacted. I'm sure they would be startled by the noise, but not as much as Hollywood might depict. Real guns don't actually sound like Hollywood guns. Indoors, it's a different story, because the walls of modern buildings act to create an echo chamber effect.
Hollywood gun sound effects are designed to frighten/startle. Real guns, fired outdoors, unless you are in close proximity, you might not even do much more than think "what's that noise", then carry on. I know I did when I accidentally trespassed on Chequers without realising what it was. Remember, these are guns, not wands of cause fear.
Consider:
I am not a demon using magic to kill you all on a whim from insane distances,
I am only a man using a technology weapon to kill you all on a whim from insane distances.
Now, dont you feel better... knowing what is slaughtering you whout ability for you to fight back?
What part of that statement is significant to the guys getting killed from unreachable enemies?
Just how would you run the modern guys?
We all know that if we had a pair of guys naked except for a m14 and canteen,
and the GM was going to throw 10 guys with pistols & chainsaws at us,
how many of you guys would have the M14 guys charge the chainsaw guys?
Rather than... lets say, sit back 500m and kill all the pistoleros before they get close enough to fire a shot?
Why would anyone assume a rifle troops LT/Capt/Col would do any different against the romans
*shrug*
Before we go into psych-warfare, there needs to be an established scenario beyond: US goes to ancient Rome. Fight.
and not to be sounding like a pick always but that beef joke was good, incorrect but good
That's scenario dependent, not to mention they'd actually have to be told this. If they won't consider the US troops gods, I don't think time travelers is high on the list either. Besides, what's to say that the US soldiers weren't sent to an alternate timeline for some absurd experiment, and will be picked up in X days?
Before we go into psych-warfare, there needs to be an established scenario beyond: US goes to ancient Rome. Fight.
The original question from IMDB this topic was based on stated that the U.S. soldiers have no way back (it's a one-way trip, essentially) and gave no reason as to why either side started fighting.
And the Romans could possibly capture and interrogate a soldier. Unlikely, I know, but it's the only way that comes to mind.
The original question from IMDB this topic was based on stated that the U.S. soldiers have no way back (it's a one-way trip, essentially) and gave no reason as to why either side started fighting.
Ah, see, I don't have an account there, and am too lazy to make one, so I missed that. :P
And the Romans could possibly capture and interrogate a soldier. Unlikely, I know, but it's the only way that comes to mind.
Don't forget the language barrier. A guy screaming gibberish, even if it's true in some foreign language, won't tell you much. >_>
It's where both sides in a war movie speak English, even if English isn't their natural language :P.
Okay, your point about hollywood, i never mentioned that, i didn't even talk about gun is stargate, i've been around when men have fired M16, M14, M1911, M9. But the argument still stands, firearms are very loud, have you had a 8mm Mauser fire behind your head and have your ears ring for over 5 hours and still hunt?
No, to be fair, I haven't had a gun fired at that kind of range. And, if the moderns have any sense, no Roman ever would either. At any range where their technology advantage is at all meaningful, the sound of the gun will not be a factor.
I can hear a rifle shot, generally when i'm hunting up to 2 miles away,(3 miles if its bigger than a .308), imagine with in 200 meters? They are loud rounds, yes the M16 fires a 5.56mm by 45mm which is compared to about 1.5-2 times the sound of a .22 rifle but have you even come close to hearing a M243 SAW fire that thing will make you deaf, let alone a M60 or a heavy machine gun. And my information is assuming its taking into aspects that have been discussed by professors and latin teachers a like.
Yes, you're right, the person firing these guns will need ear protection of a cure deafness spell (http://www.healthyhearing.com/articles/20264-blast-in-ears-good). otoh, These are the guys who are actually firing the things that make the noise. their ears are a mere foot or three away from the sound source. Like all good energy sources, sound follows an inverse square function. What may be a very loud gunshot to the soldier holding his rifle, say 2 feet from his eardrums, will be 1/10,000 as loud (a difference of 80 decibels)to an enemy combatant 200 feet away. That's about equivalent to a loud shout for most man-portable heavy guns at that distance. Startling, but hardly a threat to their ears. I don't think any fire teams would really want to engage much closer than that.
Oh, and once you've opened fire, kiss goodbye to any stealth you may have had. Nothing in Roman days would have made a noise like that. Your gun will certainly stop them coming at you (if they are that stupid). But don't pretend they won't know where you are with reasonable accuracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_pressure_level#Examples_of_sound_pressure_and_sound_pressure_levels
http://www.abelard.org/hear/hear.php#how-loud
But your technology is incorrect when you said they had "hand held cross bows" that was the greeks, not the romans, even if the romans would have stole it from them it was too slow for their army, only in the very, very late roman empire was even close to crossbows in massive use(1500 AD).
The Romans themselves didn't use crossbows. They didn't even use arrows in most military units. These were almost exclusively the domain of the auxiliaries they employed in their armies. Not considered Roman soldiers, but under their command in any practical sense. Crossbows were available to the greeks for a long time. The Romans employed greek soldiers. It seems unreasonable to claim the Romans would have been unable to field any crossbow-armed soldiers as auxiliaries.
When i brought up the conquistadores and mesoamerica, i was talking about the technology barrier not the ethics or beliefs of the Aztecs and Romans, the Aztecs were more like the Carthaginians than anyone (with the child sacrifices and all).
You're right of course that Cortes had a technology advantage. But his real advantage was his astute political ability to get the subject nations to rise up against the Aztecs. Had the Aztecs been united and ready to fight from the start, he'd have been a minor footnote in the history books, not the first an greatest conquistadore. He didn't even have enough ammunition and gunpowder on board to fight a sustained war with ranged weapons, and he was so hopelessly outnumbered that once it came to melee (as it would once the ammunition ran out), he'd have been toast without the allies he had recruited.
and not to be sounding like a pick always but that beef joke was good, incorrect but good
Thanks
good points, but i'm tired of argue this, its fun but its hard with out actually having a scenario go down like this.
How much do time machines go for these days?
Don't need money, don't take change. Don't need no credit card to ride this train.
scenario setup:
US Military: JSF (joint strike force)
With the world running low on various resources, viable faster than light travel and interplanetary colonization methods still five years down the road. Project Philadelphia was reactivated the JSF is sent to another timeline (me avoiding paradox problems :D ) this timeline started later than ours meaning it is 19 BC and aside from some minor geographical differences (mudslides when the earth formed, some places are higher some are lower, and so on) it is the equivalent of the Roman Empire under Cesar Augustus. The JSF is to establish a beachhead by any means necessary supplies can be sent for support, but it is to risky to send more men until they set up the resonator beacon. The JSF is composed of elite US military forces from across the board, Marines, helicopters, armored divisions, support staff, and your regular jack of all trades grunt.
Their goal is colonization and resource harvesting to give the US that final push into true space travel. They come from a world desperate with too many mouths to feed, that means if they get the Resonator Beacon up Rome is screwed twelve ways to sunday.
Leader: Two Star General Warrent Slade, a westpoint graduate and two star general who served in the Terrorwars and learned many hard lessons. While no MacArthur (if they sent their best and he died where would they be?)he is a smart general and a good man, his orders are to get the beacon up by any means necessary if that means breaking the roman expeditions over his camouflaged knee then so be it...
The Empire of Rome: When bright lights, strange happenings, and a large tower were reported in the forests of Germania a small expedition was sent to investigate. The Germanic barbarians captured in the raid were babbling about wizards, warriors, and a massive army.
much more measured the Romans dismissed the accounts of magic as "barbarian prattle" but took the accounts of an army very seriously. then came a misplaced attempt at diplomacy by the JSF, a flying drone delivered both a warning and a bribe.
"Germania is now territory of the United States of America, we shall endevor to be good neighbors, (see attachment), The JSF thanks you for your cooperation and looks forward to working with your people in the future" enclosed in addition to the note was a large block of salt (a resource as good as gold in the roman)
The senate flew into panic many senators used the fears for their own advantage. Sarius Quinn a roman general of some renown put forth a battleplan destroy this "tower" and in it's panic the senate approved it. With the Emperor's blessing Saruis Quinn marches to war with a massive roman army intent on crushing this odd uprising.
Leader: General Sarius Quinn: a young and brash Roman general with decent training and his share of experience, he is a sound tactican and veteran of two campaigns. Though leaving the exact workings of inventors and philosophers to themselves he is not a superstitious man, and his men respect him for it. He is a true roman through and through he gives no quarter and offers none, and has no problem with looting and pillaging as part of the victory celebrations.
?Did the U.S. military lose their morals around the same time
how do you lose a big painting on a wall?
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mural
how do you lose a big painting on a wall?
You lose the wall.
Ethnic's ethics can be seen in their mural's morals
my my aren't oyu the clever one?:P
Would inflicting the Romans with the Metric System be considered a PsyOp, or WarCrime?
Both
Did the U.S. military lose their morals around the same time
No I picked that scenaro because desperation breeds conflict in even the kindest and peaceful of mortal souls.
The US military is made up of men and women of diffrent goals, backgrounds, and drives. Some are evil some are good, but they are nontheless a military fighting force.
As such some of the soldiers respect the romans for their contrabutions to history and culture and as such would perfer a peaceful path. Some think in classic "kill'em all let god sort'em out" mentality.
Nontheless the Romans are give them three choices, fight, flee, or die, and the JSF ain't running and sure as hell aren't going to laydown and die.
It is Lawful Nutural (desperate) VS Lawful Nutural (agressive), not Good Vs Evil.
"Sartus emerges from his tent into the mist and fog, he does his morning exercises, looking over to the general at the end of the row of tents he thinks of the stories told by the barbarians. The superstisious dullards said gods of the forest were building a tower, enlisting some of the tribes. Those that attacked were struck down by thunder and fire. Sartus was no barbarian, he was a Roman, he knew better, the gods did not strike men down like that, at least... not anymore. Thus it stood to logic that some barbarian kingdom was building a big bloated watchtower, and uniting the tribes in the process. Heck maybe they had borrowed some civilized invention, after all the lighthouse of alexandria could burn ships at sea. Then came a boud boom the head of Rollus, an officer whom he had known since the acadamy painted the tent.
Another shot rang out this time Sartus saw the flash and the figure behind it. whatever they were using it was being manned by humans, and humans... could be killed. Sartus headed towards the flash using stumps as cover, he had no idea that they provided no protection. seven more booms seven more flashes seven more dead officers before Sartus reached the source he charged towards the pair and...."
let you come up with the rest
.On the other hand if you introduce magic things get interesting and it wouldn't even have to be prevelent (magic being almost extinct even by that time period) just one genuine oracle who told the Roman empire of the barbarian invaders from the demon plane of America coming to wipe them out. Massive Roman army sitting at their arrival site ready to attack while their disorientated from the transit. Troop steps through portal and gets a dozen pilums thrown at him.
The Roman troops wouldn't even have to really win only do enough damage to force the JSF to abandon their plans to establish the beacon before acting. Sure Rome would still be at a major disadvantage but they could possibly keep the pressure on enough to prevent reinforcements coming through leaving the the Americans back home wondering what went wrong.
Meanwhile the players have to rally a fighting force, break out from the entrenched Roman forces, go into hiding, consolidate and start fighting a guerilla war campaign to try and retrieve the technology they need to call in backup.
Of course there's also the matter of disease (which may have been mentioned but I haven't time right now to read through 12 pags of text). The American troops might technically be healthier but they're still carrying a petri-dish of deadly diseases around with them that while they're immune to them those they encounter wont be. Its entirely possibly they'd inadvertantly unleash a massive plague on earth devestating the population of dozens of countries, or on the other hand catching something like say smallpox that they werne't immunized against because its extinct in their time.
Oh, so we are talking it is going to be a fair fight then.
Seems we still get to see how badazz the roman pwn the Moderns, as long as we tilt the scales 95% in favor for the romans. Holy cow, not only do we gift the romans with numbers, initiative, and posistion, but lets slap a Dazed on the modern as well..... to be fair.
Are there any sceanarios that dont require the modern leadership to be braindead while the romans get every advantage they could wish for?
Of course it will be a short campaign,
the modern leadership knows a short campaign is the only way they can win, and will finish it in one day, the romans will either be surrendered or allied by a Shock&Awe overwhealming tech display (tanks/arty/Air/comms/mobility).... roman campaign over day one. The senate will have a hard time postering that they wont lose, when thay are meeing near the rubble of where their senate hall used to be.... it just inexplicably exploded 10mins after they got a warning to evacuate it .
Whether the enemy is raining fire from the sky to kill you by magic,
or if he is raining fire from the sky to kill you with technology,
is less important than the fact that he, by whatever means, CAN RAIN FIRE FROM THE SKY TO KILL YOU!
besides the spifics of the campain depend on which side the PCs are on.
make em roman and you can have them struggling to survive and save their empire from a more powerful army, if they are JSF they are stranded in the past with few men but many supplies they must protect the tower and get it up and running with the entire empire baring down on them
DM: next time don't charge a tank, alone, with a sword and shield screaming about how great you are... next time think.
but seriously this has the potental for two campains instead of one.
I'm well aware that givin the Roman's position, foreknowledge and a dazed condition to their enemies tilts the odds massively in their favour but it was the only way I could see to allow them to do enough damage to force the PC's (assuming their American) into fighting a guerilla war to recover equipment and scientists to call in more reinforcements. In case its not clear I know modern army + modern equipment vs Roman legions = victory for the modern army, I'm looking for a way to make it interesting and able to last more than one session.
I agree having the players as Romans would be interesting, give people a reason to use the charismatic classes to try and hold their disintigrating legions together.
Hmmmmm so its "fair" to set a modern army with equipment and reinforcements against the Roman legions but not "fair" to give the Roman legions PC's?
I think he meant it's not fair for the players stuck on the Roman side...
It obviously is completely unfair to arm one side with Automatic weapons, artillery, radio comms, and dot finder smrt bombs, while the other side has a Pilum to toss before they get stabby with their sharp metal.
Isnt that the basic concept of the match-up?
What would happen with Modern vs Roman?
Well, duh, the obvious answer is the roman would get their bell rung to the tune of like 100:1 kill ratio (or maybe a 100:0 when done right)
If we have to start saying the romans get to simply handwave the Range advantage away,
and handawve the mobility advantage away,
and the recon / comms advantage away,
and the guns advantage away
uh, that is no longer a contest between the romans & Modern,
it is Romans vs stunned cavemen in modern uniforms ...or are we gonna take away the modern uniforms too? .
Seriously I figured the Roman's would be badly hurt even so but this way at least the American's would have to work for their victory and give the players a chance to have at least a short campaign.
I remember one story (titled the city who fought) where a military genius (in story terms) would often fight battle simulations against his friend. The only time one of them had beaten him was using (if I remember correctly) WWII troops against his Roman legions and even then "he inflicted embarassing casualties." Just came to mind.
If the PCs are modern have the Roman legons wating at the ready, then the players are forced into gurrlia warfare against rome trying to hold out until the second, and better equipped wave arrive in three months. Even then they must overcome Roman cunning and deal with the locals either peacefully or violently. They can take roman lands but how will the PCs hold them?
If the PCs are Roman they mush attempt to overcome the might of the JSF military machine and hold the legons togeather in the face of impossable odds. more and more waves arriving with stronger and stronger troops and weapons.
what do you think?
As for the propoganda idea it could be interesting. The Americans would have more sophisticated techniques but they might not work on the different mindset or take into accout difficulty of spreading news/information (I imagine a kind of chinese whispers effect where they convince a group of local peasants only a few months later to find out no one's joining them because their waiting for the skygods and their thunder hammers to show up while claiming the American weapons while powerful are still too weak to oppose what they've heard's coming).
"the day is new, the day is young, apollo rises with the sun
looking down on Roman lands, he finds battle raging, blood on sand.
tis not barbarians blood he sees, but his own beloved people who die and flee.
weapons of thunder, boxes of steel, breaking man, and sword, and shield.
as this new foe tears into our ranks, maims our brothers, blasts our flanks
apollo watches from on high, "save us, Help us" our brothers cry
a deaf ear he turns to our plight as machines like insects soon take flight
they steal his sky and rain down death, hitting us with dragon's breath
now we flee they do not persue, though they take captives as others do.
the tower sits against the sky, rising up to clouds on high.
these are mortal men, with mortal lives, yet how is it they scrape Apollo's sky?"
I'm thinking of a sucess version now
But would they necessarily fight, or could an alliance be made?
NO, I was taking it in the purely even sides concept.
I got this. :P My comment was directed at Senko's comment directed at Ragitsu, who said it would be a bit unfair to put potential PCs on the Roman side.
I agree it's silly to skew the scenario so unfairly from an open "fair fight" with everyone at their best on an even playing field... to "lolRomanAmbush!"
First of all, what happened to the SG1 style probe to be sent through first?
If we have good enough technology to send a legion back, why exactly can't we see that point in the timeline and notice: Holy crap! They're waiting for us!
First of all, what happened to the SG1 style probe to be sent through first?
If we have good enough technology to send a legion back, why exactly can't we see that point in the timeline and notice: Holy crap! They're waiting for us!
That's assuming the group of soldiers were foretold about the time travel and willingly sent back.
Some time later, the Romans emerge and the US forces who were at the perimeter point their weapons toward the emerging force. Hostile negotiations begin as the Romans are kinda, you know, armed to the teeth 'cause they were pulled into the modern world in the beginning of an engagement. Romans don't understand the commands to stand down - they probably wouldn't take it well even if they did - and a fight inevitably breaks out.
Romans are cut down in seconds.
It's one thing to have a handicap match with X number of US troops vs Y number of Roman troops (where Y > X), but giving an entire army the jump on the incoming US force while their coming through what is effectively a temporal choke-point? That's a turkey shoot no matter who's coming through... that is unless the tanks came through first. >>
I have to say though I'd prefer something like the grey-hole in the Necroscope series from a players perspective. Two linked portals allowing one way transit (doesn't matter which direction you start off from you can't go back via that porthole). It takes the form of a brilliant white sphere that distorts time so the people on either side can see who's coming through well before they get there (incidently as long as no one screwed up the Russian troops were easily able to keep the more powerful vampire invaders from getting out because they were as you said set up in strong defensive positions). With the other end being in a world where superantural creatres (werewolves and ampires in a manner of speaking) existed.
That could be fun to play.
I have built a quantum displacer that will transfer people & things to an alternate dimension. It only works by being engulfed in a star surface plasma to shroud the transport bubble from dimensional anchorage. One the folks are shot into the sun, they will be sent to a different dimension that we can not communicate with.
"So, all you guys need to line up to get shot into the sun and never heard from again." ;)
j/k
nobody is going to get put in a machine that makes folks disappear and never get confirmation that they were not disintegrated. Remember, we are trying to come up with scenarios that dont require the modern leaders to be brain dead. They will either have communications with the people they send, or they wont send more than the first guy that was maybe teleported / maybe disintegrated
Assuming they do have comms,
it wont be more than 20 minutes before the guys on scene see that the Romans have nothing that can hurt a tank other than setting it on fire, and there will be a WHOLE LOTTA armor sent in no time flat. Abrams & Strykers as heavy infantry, Gavins & Bradlys as cav, 110's & CEV's to blast a 500m treeless kill zone by the end of the first day for a couple dozen m134 crews defensive sweepers.
"Send less welding rods and more drywall screws"
"Lost 3 medics, send more medics"
"155 shells... lots more 155Canister shells but no use for 120DU"
"Natives love the MRE 'trackpad', send them & cases of MixedFriut"
The surrounded forces a t Bastogne and the Berlin Airlift testify as to why Communication and One Way Transport can work better than "We're all alone"
Read Only comms from the past is as simple as looking at the on site company log in the present, and when you send a bunch of MosquitoRepelent all of a sudden the new words appear in the book written back then: "Idiots at HQ sent mosquito repellant when we really need IR Goggles"
.... and guess what gets sent back 20mins after they modern guys read that?
Read Only comms from the past is as simple as looking at the on site company log in the present, and when you send a bunch of MosquitoRepelent all of a sudden the new words appear in the book written back then: "Idiots at HQ sent mosquito repellant when we really need IR Goggles"
.... and guess what gets sent back 20mins after they modern guys read that?
Sorry backstabist, but wouldn't the book have everything written in it already (as technically, all of the writting took place in the time of the Roman empire)? Time Travel, she is a sneaky mistress. :-)
As for timetravel and things being already there its up to the GM (and a serious pain speaking from experience). Some examples include fixed time events in which case they just get mysteriously swallowed up and never heard from again as they can't change history (but instead create a new alternate universe), alterable but once set on the new course it ripples forward in which case everything that was done would already be written down and they'd be faced with either changing things again or sending the mosquito repellent back because it's what they would have done had they not known they were going to do it or finally alterable non-ripple in which case things in the log only appear/change as they do them e.g. send the mosquito repellent back and it changes things altering the log.
With regards to the portals you'll note I said there were 2 linked portals (which is probably a bad way to describe the set up) what I meant is that there are two portals reasonably close to each other that link the worlds . . .
Portal 1 - - - Portal 1
Portal 2 - - - Portal 2
You can only go one way in them but you can go from earth to alternate world via portal 1 and then come back via portal 2, you can't go to earth via portal 1 and then come back through it. The only way to get permanantly stuck is to somehow go through both portals from one world to the other.
The problem is while one's nice and safe on the surface of one world and at the bottom of a military base in the other the second one is buried in a cave system on one world and an underground river system in the other making it much harder (but not impossible) to use. Radio communications don't work although a landline might (it was never tried).
Which could work quite well actually you can send troops and supplies through easily enough but getting them back except via the long route (living to the present) is impossible/very difficult until they've established a strong enough presence there to allow access to the other portal (which may require mining or submarines to access it being in a location inaccesable to all but advanced tech).
then wouldnt the Chunnel Digger & other mining equip be sent on day 2?
One word for getting the firepower to the surface: Pack Howitzer
With a steady supply of HE & WP, a dozen 75mm pack guns could clear hundreds of meters of KillZone in a few days.... including topographic adjustments by HE & AP shells. Then follow up with a week of Mulching the fallen vegetation with HE & Cannister or utilize in person Hydrocarbon Defoliation Procedures .
and the Romans dont ,
and our basic infantry can engage their melee infntry at 300-500m with M14/Garand,
then we should not choose to fight in locations where we cannot use that heavy advantage..like inside caves
By planting ammoberys in fertile gunmagazine soil,
then pointing that gun at teh local peasant farmers,
you get a bountiful crop from the farmers to keep you feed thru the winter
Barley
You can find whatever local indi plants to bitter up a wort,
but without malting barley you aint got beer.
Without beer, how can troops trade with the Romans that get wine rations
Then the two armies can try to communicate -- if no one knows latin, it would probably be tough verbally, but using writing it could work a bit better. Reasonably educated Americans generally have a feel for Latin-derived words, and could try to write things down and have the opposing legate do the same; tough, but they could decipher sentences every once in a while (if there's a Latin geek among the Americans -- maybe a Catholic chaplain -- it is, of course, far easier). Soon, they've agreed that the erstwhile enemy general (or a more pliable subordinate) will become the new dictator and gets to add "Americanus" to the end of his name, while his wife's uncle is appointed consul. The Senate agrees that this is all proper and justified once they understand the situation (i.e., military forces (Roman or American) have surrounded the Senate). The Americans and Romans learn to talk, with either some of the Americans learning Latin or some of the Romans learning English (or it's even more convenient if one of the Americans happens to know Latin).
From there, the Americans could probably cooperate with Roman manufacturers to make basic black powder and muskets. They already have the Roman Empire, but should the Parthians, Goths, etc pose a problem, this could help.
I think the biggest weakness of Rome is not technological, but political. The civilian authorities had little control over the military. An average Roman general is not so loyal to Senatus Populus que Romanus that he'd launch a suicide attack in the knowledge that after his forces have absorbed all of the bullets and died, and ten other legions have also absorbed bullets and died, the twelfth legion to attack the Americans will exhaust their ammunition, reducing them to hand-to-hand fighting and allowing the Romans to triumph. Even if there's one crazy-loyal general, there's someone on his staff who's more "pragmatic." A deal between an ambitious Roman officer and the Americans is all that's needed. A lot of senators from old patrician families wouldn't like it, but they didn't like Domitian either, and they just had to put up with it. Probably 90% of the populace wouldn't care, so long as the Americans didn't try to pressure Rome's new dictator to do anything rash like abolish slavery or halt gladiatorial bloodsports.
Of course, the particular collaboration-minded officer who they happen to get when fighting the first legion that attacks them could be unsuitable -- corrupt, uncharismatic, whatever. It's a matter of luck, although the fact that someone is a high-ranking officer already speaks at least modestly well of their ability to command. However, I think others, more suited for the job, might conclude that becoming dictator (with a few conditions from the guys with guns) is better than launching a suicide attack on Americans until they run out of ammo, and a reasonably acceptable one could be found.
Now theres a thought..suppose the American forces become friends with the Roman empire...would they try to get to the new world or not?
One thing that hasn't been made clear is exactly what the objectives of either side are. My assumption is that whatever your objectives, having the head of one of the most powerful states in the world as your client will probably help you achieve it, so installing a friendly Roman officer as dictator or emperor (depending on time period) is probably a good move.
UPDATE: I'm also not sure I'd agree with the characterization of the Americans and the Romans as "friends" in this scenario. The Americans are basically doing what Ricimer did in the mid-to-late 5th century. Ricimer did, I suppose, have an interest in seeing the remnants of the Western Roman Empire survive as well as they could, but I think that was because it was a source of power for him. The Americans in my scenario aren't really being "allies" to Rome -- they're just using existing Roman culture and institutions for their own purposes.
So, we're assuming the troops will be in it for the long haul (ammunition and fuel asides). What kind of seeds should they take back to start growing crops with?
tobbacco - obvious appeal to roman decadence
coaco - as above
coffee - as above
tomato -
potato - obvious intrest to a marching army - easily store - long life
maize - not sure how much use the romans would make of it as food - as they have oats , wheat & barley availiable - i am thinking more of a cheaper more plentiful oil source [ corn oil gives a far greater yeald / acre than oilives ]
if you are taking stuff back - how about 2 thousand incubating turkey eggs ? - enough for a viable geene pool
for reactor shilding.
Just make sure our troops get their special 'overseas deployment' shots
and bring back plenty of light artillery
and a couple dozen vials of Black Plague to hand out as party favors.... raise the roof... Brick ... House.. woo woo ... Plague it up homeboy, pass me a beer, I'm Partycus Maximus with the Latinus Mangleus
and in a month you can say
Them Romans just cant hold their
Just a spin on the biowarfare Indiancide of western expansion:
Just cough on them and you kill entire villages
Its not like they cook their meat to an internal 165/185 and use a 3compartment sink to clean&sanitize their dishes
.I think the concerns over preserving the timeline and not killing your great great grandaddy were out the window from post #1
How many tens of thousands of our ancestors may we kill with rifles/artillery with no repercussions?
Besides, if we go in and kick off a limited run plague with modern quarentine policy,
we will replace the romans as the dominant force in eurasia, and when the time comes round for the real Black Plague to sweep europe.... it will be a non-event due to the modern health codes and prevention in place by then.
By killing a quarter of the roman empire,
we will end up saving half of europe centuries later.
How many tens of thousands of our ancestors may we kill with rifles/artillery with no repercussions?
in a ` worst case scenario ` - just one death could theorectially eliminate over 1 billion people from the timestream - just 1300 years later - assuming - an unbroken line of succession [ survival of 2 offspring / generation & 3 generations / century ]
so the anialation of a 20 thousand man roman army would have a catastropic domino effect
By killing a quarter of the roman empire,
we will end up saving half of europe centuries later.
aside from the obvious retort that it would be a diffeent europe
you have to consider the immense force for change that the black death was - with 1/3 dof europe dead - it was impossible to simply carry on as before , the survival of the plague victims removes that impetus
When that happens, it will be after how many centuries of Americus running europe... that modern standards of sanitation and literacy in place will prevent the "suposed to be' plague from happening. They will already have a viable rail transit system, water purification and sewage treatment facilities, english taught in public shools, crop rotation and chemical fertilizers that will eliminate most famines of record too
By the sent back modern forces telling the roman empire to sit down & shut up,
we will save millions of lives and get to pl5 almost 2000 years early.
anything we have inoculation for we can use... what are we requiring kids to get shot up with before they can go to school these days? What is in the overseas shots for military?
Just pick some bug we can get out shots for,
and carry back a few pallets of active spores of it to give out to the new neighbors.
Since anchient romans have not signed the Gen/Hague, we are not techincally breaking the rules, right ;)
Question: how vulnerable are modern armed forces to the Black Plague?
not very - mainly because the ` accepted model ` of the black death - ie bubonic plague transmitted to humans by fleas bites hosted by rats
is slow moving - the modern task force camp would have far better sanitation / clean living quaters to begin with - pluss far more aggressive pest controll as standard
once bubonic plague was reported in the area - the sanitation / hygine discipline would be ratched up
also bubonic plague = a bacterial infection [ Yersinia pestis ] - not viral - so antibiotics will treat it - you dont ` need a vaccine or suffer the mortality rate [ 40% BTW ] `
also bubonic plague = a bacterial infection [ Yersinia pestis ] - not viral - so antibiotics will treat it - you dont ` need a vaccine or suffer the mortality rate [ 40% BTW ]
oh, then that wont do... it wont do at all for our purposes
What about Smallpox, we need something that all our boys get vaccinated against, and all their boys die from... like the way we deployed biowarfare troops against the american indians... we gave them a tricky code name: Settlers.
Pack up everything you own,
head west
find fertile new lands, meet the locals
and cough on them
Its not like they can retaliate with chemical warfare,
unless you count the whole Tobacco thing they did to us ;)
anyhoo, the romans dont have tobacco, so we dont have to worry about that
Its not like they can retaliate with chemical warfare,
unless you count the whole Tobacco thing they did to us ;)
anyhoo, the romans dont have tobacco, so we dont have to worry about that
We could give them tobacco and get them addicted...moral of the story, don't be an ass
I have to change my vote to
US Troops would get their buts kicked real copius like by the Romans
so we gimp the guns and boost the bows,
take grenades away from all but high level troops,
and of course we have to knock down artillery to just what a roman mage can do
... what? No roman mages?.... guess anything over 7mm is just not availible to modern troops
and what do we have left?
A nice balanced fight where Swordsmen get upto7[w] damage and gunmen (rangers) only get 4[w]... in the new FrontLoaded HP battlescape....
of course the HP Bucket swordy romans will kick the gimped rifleman Modern azz
. Some things are just better than other things, and some people perform better in some roles than other people.Balisitc armour(ment to take a bullet) > Bronze armour(ment to take a sword)
M16A4 (multiple rounds/second, more than 1000ft range) > Spear (pointy? 6 feet range?)
9mm pistol (15clip, good range) > Shortsword? (5 ft range?)
Guns vs blades, guns win.
By the way, it's magazine and not "clip" ;).
they have already made horribe tactical and strategic mistakes and deserve to get stuck like a pig
It should be noted though, that even if an armor is good against bullets, it may not be good against spears/swords.
By the way, it's magazine and not "clip" ;).
Clip/Mag, same thing, seriously, my dad was in the infantry and when we go out shooting the .22 he calls it a clip or mag interchangably.
Also, ballistic armour is also good for knives, modern soilders are still trained to use knives, so spears and swords would be similar. It's not just kevlar in the armour either, there is also steel plates in the armour over vital areas.
Here is a real simple test of an armor:
If the manufactured is not bragging about the NIJ Level his armor meets, it dont meet it.
There are many "Guard Armor"s out there that not only have a decent balistic rating, but have terrific Spike and Stab ratings... it is designed to be worn in the land of Shivs after all
Clip/Mag, same thing, seriously, my dad was in the infantry and when we go out shooting the .22 he calls it a clip or mag interchangably.
And? No matter who uses the term incorrectly, it's still incorrect.
I know Hollywood won't stop any time soon, but if I can get one person to change their guncabulary, it will be worth it.
--
But anyways, I do agree that all squad/short term engagements will be in favor of the U.S. soldiers. It's now the long term that i'm interested in.
And? No matter who uses the term incorrectly, it's still incorrect.
I know Hollywood won't stop any time soon, but if I can get one person to change their guncabulary, it will be worth it.
--
But anyways, I do agree that all squad/short term engagements will be in favor of the U.S. soldiers. It's now the long term that i'm interested in.
My dad was in the infantry for 12 years, I think he would know the (lack of) difference between a Mag and a Clip. This is also in Canada where everyone learns about every weapon and most explosives. I lived in millitary housing for 6 years, surrounded by other military familys, and they all called it a clip, mag, or even a box. It even says Clip on half of our mags/clips and Mag on the other half on the side of some of our clips So unless you have first hand experience I'm pretty sure 1000 military families are right.
Just because 50000 folks use the wrong term dont make it right.
And it certainly is not propper to defend the wrong nomenclature so adamantly.
Will you say that the fat red guy with the rotary gun in DOOM had a Chaingun?
Sure 50000 folks will say it is a chaingun, which would be 50000 errors.
Boeing is pretty specific about what can and cant be called a Chaingun,
and the mechanical analysis of rotary guns excludes them from the term chaingun,
and I have seen what comes out of a rotary gun, and it is bullets not chains, so it aint a chaingun that way either
Millions of people think a 15w CF Lightbulb uses 1/4 the electricity of a 60w Inc bulb.
Those millions are wrong, the 15w CF does not use 1/4 of 60w.
But the packaging and advertizing and millions of folks say it does..... when it dont.
Are rice 'carbs' bad?
Millions of Atkins devotees say they are,
Billions of asia dwellers say rice = life. (also, Lance Armstrong is known to eat a carb or two)
Being in the military dont make you right.
Back when we had Jeeps 880's & HumVee's, it was a dirty joke to call it a Hummer.
Now old folks like me can laugh everytime someone calls them a Hummer.
And dont get me started on the Thunderbolt-II
many of us Modern players have a dd214, some from back before Fun In The Sun One
We dont have to ask our dads about time in the military,
we ask our ... selves.
Which other surrounding people besides the Romans will pose a threat to the intrepid group of U.S. soldiers?
Let me see, it depends on where they landed.
Dacia/Thracia: the barbarians north of greece, they would later become Romania and all those other eastern european states south of poland. These were actually civilized trading partners of the Romans. Depending on the era they may or may not be a roman province yet. If not they make good use of the natural mountain terrain and dark forests using ambushes and guerrilla tactics. when they cut off their spice trade (mostly salt) the Romans invaded, it was bloody but the Roman combo of brute force and diplomatic thinking succeeded eventually. They used traps and ambushes all the time.
Pitcs: proto scot tribes and successor to the Scottish Celts that neither the romans nor the Britons were never able to put down. Known for painting themselves blue and diving into the battle. That and their sheer numbers. Pictraiders would appear from nowhere, in overwhelming force, crush a settlement, then disappear. If encountering picts falling back on Indian fighting tactics might not be a bad idea. Picts rarely used horses, chariots, or even bows, but were fast on foot and brutal up close. their style was closer to appachie braves actually than actual scots.
The idea of a JSF lieutenant sighting one and screaming "circle the trucks, guns to the ready, get the women and children inside." gunfire would not deter a Pict army right off they were used to Roman "wonder weapons" though I'm pretty sure they would learn to fear the gun eventually, and then attempt to adapt. JSF would probably have to eliminate them in their homes to put an end to them.
Germanic tribes: they were a brutal people good at ambushing in their native forests which they revered.
Slavs: towards russia and the black sea were the Slavic tribes, not a particular threat but they were stubborn. they also were the source of the Amazons of greek myths, because their women often went to battle with the men.
Parthia: where Turkey is today there was the kingdom of Parthia.
however in later eras they would be overthrown by the Sassanid Empire:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassanid_dynasty The Romans regarded the Sassanids along as equals which gives some idea of their cultural and military might. however in later eras they reversed their policy of religious tolerance Zarazostisim alone was their religion. they could be allies or enemies depending on the era. I'm pretty sure most JSF personnel are not Zoats, and would be hated in the later empire.
Berbers: the tribes of the Sahara desert
Egypt: may or may not be a roman provance
Goths/Saxons/others: these hail from Scandinavia and until the empire began to collapse they were bottled up.
Sarmatians
Ferocious horsemen and skilled archers, the Sarmatians were a dominant force in the lands east of the Tanais (now the Don) river. Little is known of the Sarmatians, other than that they are of Iranian descent and akin to the Scythians. They came to be a powerful force in eastern Europe, often leading successful raids on the Roman Empire. They remained the dominant force in the region until the arrival of the Gothic and Hunnic peoples. The Sarmatians will be located in the area east of Scythia, north of the Black Sea.
The forests will provide enough resources and shelter for the soldiers when they need them most.
when all the fuel for their vehicles is depleted.
That is when Self Propelled Artillery becomes OX Propelled Artillery
Fuel is for fightin, beasts are for pointA-to-pointB
we used to use Multifuel Diesels in the Deuce & 5Ton...
You mix some meth alcohol with castor oil and turpenptine and a splash of crude... vroom vroom vroom
Steam tractors are not combat equipment,
but they can move combat equipment down the road
on the bright side, no one is going to complain about carbon footprints or pollution :P.
On the other hand: given that it's the past, wouldn't fuel sources still be mostly untapped, if tapped at all? How much equipment would the military contingent need to take back to set up their own oil pump(s)?
and that brings the JSF into direct conflict with the Sarassanid Empire and their armies of heavy infantry, excellent archers, and elephants. I have no doubt the JSF would overcome the Sarassanids. The two forces could not live peacefully, the Sarassands first king was tolerant, the later ones became religous bigots. If the JSF caught them at the right time they'd make a good ally, if they showed up to late in history they'd be mortal foes of the JSF what with the JSF's multi-ethnic background and all.
think of what the JSF could do on an international scale, the people they could trade with, their contacts would be a lot more divirse than Rome's
The entire thread is, essentially, "lets see how much we can skew the odds one way or another with completely random situational conditions until we come up with a good enough excuse to justify the result we want," so it doesn't matter.
I was reading this post again today when this thought hit me: since the Roman troops are now in modern times, doesn't this mean other countries might pick up on their presence? It would be interesting to see what the Italian government has to say about this little skirmish
.I personally prefer the Fleet method of travel (taking a plot point from Birmingham's Weapon's of Fate and sequels), take a nice Navy fleet floating in the middle of an exercise and send it back to the dawn of the Roman Empire. That would be a good way to describe what forces are in play (though it then becomes US Navy vs. the Romans, and Naval superiority is King on the Middle Sea).
Now, back to today's sub-thread.
The reaction of the World depends on how much the Government (US or otherwise) wants to disclose. If they keep a Legion in the Nevada desert, well, there's not much the Italians will do or say, at least, not until the families of the soldiers sent on a one-way trip into Harry Turtledove's wet dream.
Well...
on the bright side, no one is going to complain about carbon footprints or pollution :P.
*turns over a Five ton truck*
"Woo! Look at that baby purr!"
*smoke pours out of the exhaust pipes, the engine roars*
"This is awesome. Back home we're evil polluters, here we're -like- dragon riders or something."
"You know, the brass says once we're done with the European mainland, we head over to England for the rest of them."
"So?"
"Think about this. What does England have that Italy and Germany don't?"
"Bad dental work?"
"Ha ha, no; what do they have now that Italy and Germany don't?"
"....No clue."
"Druids."
"No way. *bangs head against steering wheel* This isn't fair!"
"Yeah. They'll probably think we're actual demons. It's gonna be a riot."
"Just can't run anywhere..."
Adding to this, I seriously doubt that a Joint Strike Force would not possess the knowledge of the longbow. I'm not saying they'd know how to make them right away, but given time, they could develop it. Longbows would give the Americans genuine armor piercing capability against Roman armor. At this point, the Romans are going to have a problem if they want to attack the American base in the Alps.
There's one other thing to consider - the average American soldier is going to be stronger than the average Roman soldier. Americans (and Westerners in general) have had the benefit of several generations of advanced medical care and plentiful food supplies. So there's no guarantee that a Roman legionnaire is going to be able to take an American soldier in hand-to-hand combat. The American will be a little stronger, and almost certainly bigger.
capture, use, and manufacture would be a certainty.
Gauss guns, Lightning Fields (VdG picketing), Rotary Steam AutoCannon
leave them wondering "What the heck" this even when they capture one
running ot of petro fuel doesnt mean internal combustion engines are worthless,
and it certainly doesnt mean electical equipment and motors would fail
... generators need 'rotate', not 'fuel', to make electricity and Steam is good at making 'rotate'
heck, a nuke power station is just a steam generator (nuke boiler & steam turbine altenator)
You need a forge to make a big piece of metal out of small metal,
the motor pool will have welders and cutters to repurpose metal without drastic chages
- deisel engine blocks can be re-cammed to become Steam Inline6 engines
- many designs will incorporate using materials at hand... like sheetmetal-lamination instead of block
besides, its not a question of IF they setup an industrial base,
but when they do it.
It is not a 5day nor even a 30day priority, but probably in the 6mo- 1yr plan
.Wide distribution WP shells to torch Rome, and pop some steel rain once in a while to make sure nobody tries to put it out.
After we pull a Dresden on a few towns,
they will have new priorities on Self Identity, Self Rule, and Self Preservation.
It wont be long till "In exchange for everything we want, we will stop burning your towns" sounds like a pretty good deal.
Or, hit them logisticly:
Cities dont create food, they need to bring it in. We just drop a few shells on every grain mill in 200miles, and they can try creating new recipies for uncracked wheat and see how bread comes out using whole kernels of grain instead of flour.... you can just forget about Biscuits&Gravy
There are always some survivers,
and the folks that have their act together enough to survive earn their plane in the ongoing gene pool.
American is not a race, its an attitude.... like Texan
Cities dont create food, they need to bring it in. We just drop a few shells on every grain mill in 200miles, and they can try creating new recipies for uncracked wheat and see how bread comes out using whole kernels of grain instead of flour.... you can just forget about Biscuits&Gravy
Grain mills? This isn't the 20th century industrial food production era. In Roman times, a grain mill would be a very small affair. Bombing out every one of them would put a significant dent in warhead supplies. A great many households would have purchased uncracked grain and ground it in the kitchen.
a grain mill would be a very small affair. Bombing out every one of them would put a significant dent in warhead supplies
a) We know that, THEY DONT
b) sure it will take a lot of blowing up folks, but by putting a dent in our muntions inventory will put a dent in their Population inventory... That is a policy I have no problem with: spend ammo to kill folks.
I'm just pointing out that Famine & hunger was a real threat back in those days,
why not just create some famine on their azz.... or just firebomb rome with WP... either way works for me.
The easiest way to win a fight with the romans
is to eliminte the romans prior to the fight.
Genocide is illegal, not impossible... or even 'difficult' for us against them
I'm just saying what you are all thinking
.... or are all thinking is an abomination and offense to the laws of god & man
what
ever
Naval blockade engagement-
100+ roman ships vs
1 late ww2 PT boat with a 40mm
The area of rome divided by the blast radius of a modern nuke times the cost of a modern nuke = Money required to destroy rome
Guys, this isn't complicated, its a simple equation:
The area of rome divided by the blast radius of a modern nuke times the cost of a modern nuke = Money required to destroy rome
Sorry, not buying it.
Sorry, not buying it.
Why......
If you get a political surrender, you can use that to gain all the provinces intact. If you nuke the capital, that option is lost.
If you get a political surrender, you can use that to gain all the provinces intact. If you nuke the capital, that option is lost
if you get a political surrender
you have to worry about them plotting to stab you in the back
.... not that the old school romans were political as well as literal back stabbers in their impeachment of Ceaser
To desire a political surrender from them
would require us trusting the guys that stab their own leaders in their senate
.... lets not do that.
Our military strength is dependant on stand off encounters. Once we accept entry into the city, we lose the insane advantage we have over them. Our riflemen & technology would not be as well suited to 'occupying' Rome as they are for 'taking' Rome.
We would either need to be welcomed by the romans,
or eliminate the romans.
What was that line from the beginning of Braveheart?
The problem with Scottland is that it is full of Scotts
So the brit king implemented a De-Scottification program
Set up a armed camp within modern artillery range of Rome, and then send a messnger (kidnapped Roman, or heavily-armoured car with loudspeaker system), inviting their leaders to negotiate their capitulation. The terms are simple. They do what you want, or bits of the city get blown up. You aren't replacing teh government. You're pulling their strings, and because it is teh same faces and same political structure, the chance of open rebellion and resistance among the plebs is reduced. Replace the government entirely, and the plebs start getting the idea that if one king can be replaced, so can any other. This is basic machiavellian theory here.
A conquered enemy is still your enemy.
A genocided enemy is unnoteworthy.... "vapors dont shoot back"
Surely the guys that plot & scheme against each other in oft lethal internal power struggles,
will simply do the same against us if we take control / occupy / oppress them.
Dead enemies dont start rebellions or act as insurgents.
besides,
if it is a naval task force
why not just go to north america and move into the basicly unclaimed lands?
We already know where all the good stuff is... like coal / iron / oil deposits & we can run right out to the geothermal active areas for power on the frontier.
Without the EPA existing for a few centuries,
we can put a really big hydroelecric plant on Niagra Falls
Yes, there are loyalty issues. But without a signifciant external threat, the moderns will have loyalty issues within their own ranks anyway. Loyalty in a modern army is partly ensured by teh fact that there really isn;t anywhere a deserter can run to. These time travellers have plenty of hidey-holes, and significantly outgun any local. Each groundpounder on his own carries enough firepower to make himself a petty king should he choose to strike it alone - and he has no outside society to stop him either. maintaining loyalty in such a situation will be non-trivial.
Easy enough.
anyway even your own troops would oppose the use of atomic weapons on people that, lets face it, do not pose a threat worth the nuking.
they loose a city, your army is appaled by what you've done, and a couple years later you find your neck the first one to feel the axe in your new empire.
nobody presses the button for two reasons because it is very unpopular even with their own people
nukes = instant hate
the modern world evolved to fear using the atomic bomb because we understand what it could do.
unethical warfare takes a toll on your own troops morale, and they begin to question and hate you. you can only survive it for so long.
chemical, biological, or nuclear warfare results in your troops having to see the damage on the ground and since this is an american army, not the nazis, or imperal japan, your morale will go down the tubes faster than it took to press that button.
or better yet nuke everyone that opposes you
good start,
but to be safe we need to nuke anyone that might oppose us
anyway even your own troops would oppose the use of atomic weapons...
I find their lack of faith disturbing
Nukes are just our way of letting you mooks know your caveman gods hate you and have cursed that land the city was on.... look at the monsters that grow there now (mutation & malformity)
you cant make an omelet without nuking a few eggs
would the Modern Mil be more likely to transition to Gauss or Pneumatics/Steam for weapon tech in the way back?
given the lack of manufacturing and industrual base,
would the Modern Mil be more likely to transition to Gauss or Pneumatics/Steam for weapon tech in the way back?
That depends. What do the Corps of Engineers study these days?
But back in the 80's the combat engineers were engaged in field research to resolve the MGD vs MichelobDry controversy
It shouldnt be upto the engineers anyway.
If you tell the engineers to make what they know,
you will get a cooperage, and then a brewery & distillation facility,
and eventually a power plant and air conditioner factory.
But I am sure some major or colonel in the task force will get the idea to tell the engineers what to build for defense rather than chillin in the AC with a brewski
2nd platoon's motto was "Charlie Mike": Continue Mission
The Support Platoon (motor pool & HvyEq) had the motto "More Time Off, Sir"
we calls em like we sees em
My next note, the American military also has bombs. Oh what?! BOMBS? Yes, there's a bomb that can launch and hit 16 different cities across the globe---ICBM or something like that. Either way, you have the Roman empire completely dominated without a single soldier.
I read somebody saying the combined nationalities or something teaming up and it's game over if you have that many nationalities. Again, not necessarily; if you're going to argue the roman empire could win against overwhelming odds, you can't just say these "overwhelming" odds can win instantly. Think 1,000,000 villagers armed with minimal clothing and a branch vs. 10 soldiers with unlimited ammo and one tank. The villagers would be gunned down rapidly, and as somebody else said, morale would SUCK. Even without the tank, I think 10 modern soldiers could easily destroy 1,000,000 ancient villagers.
But missiles/ICBMs (to take one example) are useless in terms of capturing the Empire. Without a modern communication system and a modern frame of reference, the Romans will have difficulty discovering that the next city over has been destroyed, and it'd be tough to convince them that it was the moderns, and not a literal act of the gods.
Use them, and all you do is destroy a city, and (possibly, depending on communications) put the fear of god into them. You won't be putting the fear of you into them, because they have no frame of reference to understand that human agents can destroy a city in such a manner.
For the first, we just need stabby over there. For the second, a little bit of planning might be in order. I'm in favour of leaving the Roman political system intact but marching into the capital and declaring yourself the next emperor. It happened all the time back then, I don't think the city guard would give you much trouble if you had tanks.
.... and he was using a non-automatic rifle
Micheal Caine had better kill ratio than that vs them hordes of Zulus
... and he was using a non-automatic rifle
He was in a fortified position, the zulus were trying to capture by using zerg tactics. The Romans are smarter than that. I think.
if we become their primary supplier of Ice to the city?
We have refrigeration (compressors require Spin, not electricity)
and we can sell that service to Rome and join their tax paying empire.
Next year, maybe we will become their primary communications provider,
and after that,
introduce the guys that made concrete to the wonder that is rebar for Pad & TiltUp construction
we will be rich... buy us some mail order brides to peel our grapes
Hypothetical scenario. Why go back to Rome to fight the army if we have a time machine?
We have to go back and destroy Rome,
in order to prevent Times New Roman from ever existing,
to make the world safe for Comic SanSerif.
How else can we protect that poor, misunderstood and oft maligned font?
The M1A1 Abram tanks will find themselves blocked, yes, blocked by the roman limes. Caesar's ditches will slow the American advance to a halt.
Stop right there. We aren't stupid enough to launch an assault. We would try to get out of the era and make it back to ours, less we destroy the current world we came from.
Secondly, one Abraham tank would easily take out an entire column of roman men. They would see it, they would attack it, it would shoot them, it would squish them. even without its main gun, all they have to do is keep their main hatch shut and they win.
===
Further use of flaming arrows against the 101 Airborne Division marines will prove itself of greater importance on a flat terrain, where the marines will find virtually no cover, ending up being pinned down by a halle of arrows.
Airborne... as in part of a unit that uses aircraft. These aircraft could just drop rocks on the cities if they wanted, and the city would be doomed.
Secondly, after a single bomb is dropped on the roman capital, victory would be in the Americans hand. Word would travel fast of these new "gods" and they would quickly have countless allies from neighboring countries aiding them.
===
Oh and tell this idiot (since I'm assuming you can post in his thread) that there is this marvelous thing that checks his posts for spelling errors... What is it called again? Something like... spell checker or something like that right?
Oh and tell this idiot (since I'm assuming you can post in his thread) that there is this marvelous thing that checks his posts for spelling errors... What is it called again? Something like... spell checker or something like that right?
He claims to be a non-native English speaker that barely tolerates the language of Western pigs.
By the way, i'm still waiting to find out what "roman limes" are
.Oh, and Luix? Welcome to the boards
.By the way, i'm still waiting to find out what "roman limes" are
a lime - may , or may not be roman
the only way to correctly identify a roman lime from ` other ` limes is by complex and costly mineral trace analysis and isotope ration testing :P
i am not sure how limes , roman or otherwise will stop tanks though
fwiw, they concluded that how to handle it depends very much on the type of campaign you want to lead. In other words, who wins depends entirely on what is more entertaining for your group.
Surely it cannot be coincidence that this precise issue (Romans vs. U.S. Marines) was highlighted as a point of discussion in GURPS Time Travel?
It sure can be - I wasn't into GURPS back when I made this topic
.And isn't there a consistent objective outcome to this scenario that we can observe, rather than call it subjective based on what is entertaining?
Wouldnt modern military forces use Tequilla to deal with roman limes?
Here's a thought: is it easy to make tequila with field expedient materials?
to crater the Ph of their croplands... like salting wells, but green
I was jsut thinking that you squeeze all of the juice out of the limes and launch some how at the other side thus blinding them allowing you to make your get away
Or, if they have a certain other fruit, we amaze the Romans with lemonade!
I was jsut thinking that you squeeze all of the juice out of the limes and launch some how at the other side thus blinding them allowing you to make your get away
Or, if they have a certain other fruit, we amaze the Romans with lemonade!
Right you are! If life gives you lemons, use them to diplomatic effect towards an antiquated culture you've met due to unspecified conditions leading to a kind of 'time warp', sending you and your military compatriots into the distant past!
That's the phrase, right?
Right you are! If life gives you lemons, use them to diplomatic effect towards an antiquated culture you've met due to unspecified conditions leading to a kind of 'time warp', sending you and your military compatriots into the distant past!That's the phrase, right?
Exactly. Along with alcohol and cigarettes, we set them up with production lines for soda and lemonade so they can stay refreshed in the hot sun. As backstabbist basically said, Roman vices are nothing compared with modern vices.
I think this would be the perfect solution to the Army's stockpile of chemical weapons. Take them back in time and use them on Rome! No EPA regulations!!!!!!
And once you saturate an area with VX, no one is going in there for a very long time. Area denial. Once the Romans realized just how bad this stuff was, they would be scared to even think about approaching these new green gods.
This whole topic is rather stupid. If you take a modern American fighting force and transplant them back in time with no supply lines, they aren't a modern American fighting force. Logistics are a key component of wartime strategy.
Anyone can hop in to crap all over a thread that's been an idea exercise, so how about actually contributing and not being counter-productive to that end?
This whole topic is rather stupid. If you take a modern American fighting force and transplant them back in time with no supply lines, they aren't a modern American fighting force. Logistics are a key component of wartime strategy.
its clear you haven't read the thread...we have EVERYTHING figured out...well we're just missing how to get a time travle device owrking...
0xFF = IIVIII = CCLVI
or how to make more ammo in V.LVI and VII.LXII calibers?
I love this post, but past page 20 it tends to be overrun with posts of "How does this crap still survive?" Would it be possible to cut the crap. Maybe restart the topic will a pdf containing the major arguements to date? something/anything!
second, was the small pox idea ever run to completion? If not, here is my peice.
Think back to the conquering of the new world. The indians were overrun by small pox because they hadn't ever been exposed to it. And they even if they weren't the most high-tech sanitation society, they were certianly better than the Americans. How? Because they lived with a much smaller population density.
Also, I would debate the arguement that the romans would suffer far more than the americans. There are documents cases of indian servants breaking pustules into food which was then fed to English men, TO NO EFFECT. Because they had already been exposed, they could no longer contract it. So the Romans, having been exposed to small pox before (no, it is not a plague for them. it has already spread throughout the entire populous), would not suffer any noticable sickness.
First and formost the war potential for the United States is insane. As for the Abrahms running out of ammo, that will take a very long time. After all to quote Gen. Paton "A tank has two weapons; a main gun... and a cannon." After all the anti-infantry machine guns are a tanks best friend and the Abrahams has a top mounted machine gun, a coaxil machine gun, and for giggles a 120 smoothbore cannon. Not to mention the entire crew would at least be armed with a sidearm.
Secondly, as for Apaches being unable to engage the enemy due to range circumstances... do you have any idea how the Apache helicopters weapon system operates? Its a very precise weapon capable of very accurate shots and is frequently deployed to assist soldiers who are in close proxmity to enemy troops.
Furthermore an A10's ability to absorb small and medium arms fire, so arrows not withstanding, its full compliment of rockets, napalm, bombs and its 30mm GAU-8 Avenger Chaingun would easily decimate an entire company of enemy troops in seconds. After all it fires a sustained 4,200 RPMs and can place those shots in a tight 40' circle. Also, as a point of fact; cluster bombs haven't been outlawed yet and that has anti-ARMY potential.
Also a 50 Caliber Sniper Rifle not only can penetrate Level 8 ballistic glass, it also knocks a several inch deep hole in solid steel, blows entire limbs apart, it also has an effective and accurate range easily of 3 miles.
The Bradley IFV's primary weapon is a fully automatic 25mm ANTI-INFANTRY CANNON capable of sustained accurate fire against enemy targets. Easily decimating any horse mounted calvary charge.
If you were to observe the amount of ammunition we manufacture at any givin point, you'd realize that running out of ammo is only an issue if the enemy requires us to work without establishing forward supply depots. This won't be a problem considering the relative ease at which the Romans would be sweapt from the battlefield.
As for protecting our supply lines and forward bases; look up claymore mines, and bouncing bettys. Not having the knowledge or even the ability to detect buried landmines and munitions it would be a walking slaughter fest as they attempted any kind of night raid. Not to mention night vision and thermaloptics.
As for the ballista stratgey, you realize that a modern american howitzer can fire several miles with high acccuracy correct? With GPS targeting and precison guidance munitions there will be no place for the ballista to run or hide before what I could only imagine the romans dubbing 'whistleing death' descends upon their little heads.
And what about the ever so popular 40mm machine gun? Yes folks 40mm MACHINE GUN, in lamens' terms its a fully automatic GRENADE LAUNCHER. Up your Roman's shaft with that one. Lol.
I could keep going on and on about the modern militarys might in comparison to the Romans, but that would be pointless. And yes, if your wondering I have studied both modern and ancient warfare and weaponry.
Sooo... questions, comments?