Alexander the great is said to have the best troops in the world, but recently I read sources that said if he went to China, he would have been defeated because his phalanx would have been shattered by the Chinese crossbow.  I want some opinions on this.

Ehh... I'm thinking he's right, and it's seven.

But still, Alex couldn't conquer it all. There's no way. We duked it out with someone else and the height of the Han empire in a fight. Julius Caesar? Can't remember. Anyway, we all agreed that whoever attacked would lose horribly due to no knowledge of the terrain.

The question here is not whether Alexander would win, its whether he would reach China, and the answer is no for anyone that actually take a look at the geographic layout of Kashgaria.

"Thus Qin would be sandwiched.

I think as Alexander the Greats troops were exhausted, and probably had not met such disciplined forces as the Qin, they would be defeated, but at tremendous cost to Qin themselves. Meaning that China would not be united as quickly as they wished, and it might settle into something like what we see in Europe, many smaller powers competing.

"

Sorry fastspawn, but what are your basis for such claims, Qin's power is more than enough to stop Alexander's advance for the simple reason that Alexander's troops that invade couldn't possibily have numbered more than his typical 30,000-50,000 in his campaigns, and these are his elite troops. to travel such a distance, only small size could be mantained, large armies of hundred thousand would require enourmous logistic support which Alexander is not able to maintain thus it would only be a hinderance to his campaign. And add to the fact that he has to worry about rebellion within his own empire, large troops are need to guard his empire. Besides the reserves he could get will only be Persian ones which is of low quality in comparison. Qin on the other hand is on their own ground, has their own numerous cities to defend, inexhuastable resource considering its their own territory, and superior ramped earth walls which Greek siege craft which could only be light ones since its a distant campaign would not be able to take down, all Qin has to do is wait till Alexander's troops starve and retreat, then attack and rout. A 50,000 Macedonian troop traveling across the Taklamakan desert would not pose any danger to Qin in the slightest way. It would merely be treated as another one of those petty raids made by the Hu and Qiang tribes that are in Qin's border. And the fact that Qin has over half a million standing army is moer than enough to stop a little army of 50,000. And contrast to popular bias, Macedonian troops are not superior in battle than the armies of central plain, in equipment, tactic, organization or discipline. And considering Qin's(as well as the other central plain states) vast resource due to superior agriculture and blast furnace metal production, its resource would not end. Conquering Qin is like conquering Rome during hannibal, even if Qin could be defeated in battles, in would not loose the war. Only Qin's resource is greater than Rome's, and Alexander has to travel through far tougher terrain than Hannibal making Alexander's chance of vicotry virtually zero.

All this is of course assuming Alexander would get to China at all which is extremely doubtful since the tarim basin is a desert with little oasis to support his army.

Date Confusion. Deleted.

Alexanders' troops would take tremendous losses in their route to China. They would have to indure the strains of mountains, steppes and the constant raids by tribesmen which alone could disintergrate the army.... So it is just not possible to attack China in my opinion.

About the crossbow affair, I think Alexander's troops would have been able to block them out with their shields and the tortoise formation. But I don't know much on the subject so I am not going to pretend.

Nope, Alexander's men would be far too weary of war to even advance into China.  Like warhead pointed out, invading Qin would be like invading the Roman Republic, that is, impossible to completely take the land.

To be honest, this far out of an invasion would likely be impossible for any army of this time.  I'd easily say that if Qin were to strike through Persia and attempt an invasion of Greece, they too would fail miserably. 

But hypothetically, if India and Persia were to magically dissapear with East Asia at the doorstep of Macendonia...

Hmmm, my bet is on the Qin or Han or whatever Chinese would have fought Alexander. Probably biased 'cause I'm Chinese tho'.

I read a translation of the Art of War where the guy (a white military dude, not sure what country, I think American) talks about if Alexander ever made his way into China, he would have faced a foe far stronger than any before. And crossbows. And Jet Li & Donnie Yen!

*I think if the Qin never 'united' China, Han would have just done it. Hypothetical situations are always very vague, the nature of it being that it never happened.

Very, very, good post, War.

I just see one flaw, though. I think Alexander could keep around 75,000 men, and maybe a few thousand replacements from conquered Chinese cities. Although, I agree with the end point, Qin would win. But what damage would it suffer? Would it open it up to an early fall?

And, it's been proven many times, those Chinese Crossbowmen would dominate the Cavalry. They'd simply ambush them when they're going slow through the mountains, and eat them alive. Few, if any, chinese deaths, and a horde of Macedonians down.

"What the barbarian fears most is the crossbow"

Barbarians referred to the horsemen that plagued China, quote may be from the Han dynasty(not really sure) but it was part of this essay about how effective crossbows were vs mounted opponents.

Hmmm, didn't China begin to use cavalry when Alexander was around? At the very least mounted archers.

Personally, I think that if Alexander would have attacked China he would have been badly defeated.  He could have caused considerable damage, but there's just no way to conquer that large of an empire(land and population) from that far away.  But i also don't think China could have conquered the Greek Empire, because the distance was just too great. 

I think a more interesting topic to contemplate is what would happen if the two armies met in a battle, not counting logistics or supply lines, which army would win?  I would have to go with China, because their army would have been much larger in number and much more technologically advanced, but i don't know too much about China. 

Also, another interesting thing to think about is whether the Persian Empire looked conquerable or not.  No one could have forseen Alexander conquering that empire either.  China was definitely different then Persia, but its an interesting comparison of two massive empires.

Edit: Hmm...the time/date thing must still be messed up, since i posted this after Kubrat's post.

Thanks for the information, but I still want some comparison between Alexander's troop and the Chinese troops, what are their strengths, tactics imployed, weapons and organizations? I want to know what type of troops the Chinese used. I know that the Macedonian army isn't solely based on phalanx, they also had light infantries such as the peltasts which guarded the flanks and rear. It was used very effectively by Philip in the Battle of Chaeronea in which the light infantry lured the Athenian Hoplites away from the Thebans and Alexander's heavy cavalry smashed the thebans. Alexander also had archers and javelin throwers in the front line and his most successful weapon is the companion cavalry. So one can't solely judge the result based on the fact that crossbow can shatter the phalanx because phalanx isn't the only thing that Alexander used. Alexander also had archers and javelin throwers in the front line and his most successful weapon is the companion cavalry. So I want some opinion of a battle between equal number of troops between the two armies.

From what I know...

Chinese armies at that time were well into professionalization, meaning the officers earned their ranks by merit. Money and blood ties still help, of course. Elite units were commonly formed, picking out the strongest, bravest, quickest, etc. men to form special forces. Elite shock troopers are one such use. Sun Tzu's 'Art of War' would have already been 200 years old and well circulated.

Cavalry was in use, chariots were phased out in the times of Sun Tzu, so I imagine there wouldn't be any in use.

The 'parthian shot' was in use practically since the first man with a bow sat on a horse.

Iron was in use, so was steel (but uncommon). I'm not too sure on the steel actually

I believe common equipment was a 'dagger-axe' polearm, composite bows, and crossbows.

They had also made many agricultural advancements. Add to that their massive cities (largest in the world) and size of the Empire, some believe in 200 B.C.E. Han had a population of 60 million. Of course those could not all be combatants, but a good chunk of that would be young, able bodied men.

Then again, Alexander was around the time of Qin, right? So those stats are probably much higher than Qin's

How would Chinese crossbowmen slaughter the palaynx squares if they advance in tortoise formations?

The Phalanx formations would just smash through the Chinese dagger-axe infantry lines in my opinion. Surperior stabbing distance and deeper ranks. Unless that is if they get surrounded and massacred.

"what are their strengths, tactics imployed, weapons and organizations? I want to know what type of troops the Chinese used. I know that the Macedonian army isn't solely based on phalanx, they also had light infantries such as the peltasts which guarded the flanks and rear. It was used very effectively by Philip in the Battle of Chaeronea in which the light infantry lured the Athenian Hoplites away from the Thebans and Alexander's heavy cavalry smashed the thebans. Alexander also had archers and javelin throwers in the front line and his most successful weapon is the companion cavalry. So one can't solely judge the result based on the fact that crossbow can shatter the phalanx because phalanx isn't the only thing that Alexander used. Alexander also had archers and javelin throwers in the front line and his most successful weapon is the companion cavalry."

Here is some good information by Yun from Sun Bing's manual.

The Wu �� - five-man squad in line astern.

The Dui �� - 10 Wu in line abreast (5 men deep and 10 across) 50 men

The Bo �� - Two Dui in line abreast (5 men deep and 20 across) or line astern (a square 10 men deep and 10 across) 100 men

The Qu �� - Two Bo in line abreast (5 men deep and 40 across) or line astern (20 men deep and 10 across) 200 men

The Square ���� - made up of several rows of Qu, with the HQ in the middle of the rear row. Not necessarily a true square, can be rectangular. A favourite tactic was to place stronger Qu on the flanks, and then lure the enemy to attack the centre and be outflanked.

The Circle Բ�� - a Qu reformed into a ring, with the HQ protected within it. A highly defensive formation.

Dispersed Formation ���� - increasing the distance between individual Qu in a square, so as to mislead the enemy or divide his forces.

Close Formation ���� - decreasing the distance between individual Qu in a square, for strength in close-quarter fighting.

The Awl ׶(zhui)��֮�� - A wedge (triangle with one point facing forward), a highly offensive formation. Also known in later history as the Male Formation ��(pin)�� (you'll see why later).

The Wild-Goose-Flight Formation ��(yan)��֮�� - A V-formation with two wings for enveloping the enemy and the HQ in the middle. Or an inverted-V for a defensive formation that can quickly be converted to offensive wedge. The V-formation can also be modified into a flattened U known as the Basket Formation ��(ji)���� or Female Formation ĵ(mu)��, for luring enemy wedges into the centre and then enveloping them.

The Hook Formation ����֮�� - A line abreast with the two ends sloping inwards to avoid being flanked. Probably most suitable for archers or crossbowmen.

There is never a standard organization in Chinese armies because like the later Byzantine, they do not want the enemy to know how much troops they actually have. These divison could be aranged differently, for example, the standard is a Qu, higher would be the Jun(army) which could range anywhere between 2000-6000).

The typical tactic of Chinese warfare is very different from that of west, with its more powerful missile, Chinese warfare depend far more on firepower than shock as the ancient classical west had. Most of the time except when one army has the higher ground, the two army would be a great deal distance away in looser formations sometimes digging trenches or hide at slopes until enemy fire lessens then they would charge with their speed infantry, thats how Qin won its battles. This is of course ignoring the other elements to a battle such as skirmish and surprise.

"Also, with the exception of missiles I would say that Alexander the Great's troops have superior infantry since they are probably heavier armed and has more shock power.

The Phalanx formations would just smash through the Chinese dagger-axe infantry lines in my opinion. Surperior stabbing distance and deeper ranks. Unless that is if they get surrounded and massacred."

Military battles are far more complex than just heavy armed trample through light ones, unless you're talking about a narrow hill in the case of Thermoplae.

Warring state armies especially that of Qin was not as heavily armed, Qin's armour unlike many other states was not very heavily armoured, their armoured troops did not have full protection and rarely carried shields. Qin sacrified protection for mobility, and from the examination of its armament, it would indicate Qin always took the offensive. From examination of the Qin formation, it has a vanguard force, which was a deadlier version of the Greek archer and peltasts of the front and rear. The vanguard is made up of three rows of crossbow and bowmen, using rotational fire, and could have a pavise for protection. The bolts of their weapon are unmatched in fire power by the Macedonian troops. And they could punch right threw a hoplite shield(The first emperor of China, Cotterell p.48) They are lightly armed for speed, so they could retreat with speed and fire from far away. Their agility and speed along with the light spearmen behind them and those guarding the flanks when utilized correctly would be impossible for an enemy to catch it off balance. They are similar to the role of the Peltasts, but more efficient, for their archer has far stronger fire power. Those behind the vanguard is the chariot and light infantry that accompany it, the chariot are light and used to breakthrough enemy formation with speed while the light infantry and the heavy ones behind it charge to exploit the opening, these troops ar eheavier armoured than the rest for they have to do hand to hand combat, but the strong part of Qin was its Halberdiers which inflict great damage on nemy. Behind are rear guards which guard Qin's rear.

Qin has a left Wing divison, which was designed to be far more mobile, they wore little armour and carried no shields, they have archers in the front, light chariots and cavalry along with light infantry behind. These are used to attack with great speed on the opponent flanks which is a common tactic.

This organization is as follows:

A vanguard of archers together with unarmoured infantrymen.

A cavalry unit occupying the left flank.

A chariot unit occupying the right flank.

A main unit of cavalry and chariots subdivided into 8 columns occupied the center in a rectangular formation.

A cavalry unit covered the rear.

In general, warring state army were not as strong in shock power, but are far more flexible and mobile, this formation was known in Chinese military lore as `Concentric Deployment', a tactic in which each unit could fight either independently or as part of the whole. In another word, each Wu, Dui, Bo Qu, Jun could fight by as separate units and move independently or together. Their different arms in proportion enable greater military movement and orderexecution while the difference enabled fighting as a whole like a phalanx or when the formation is broken fight as individual unit with halberds, Ji, spears and swords. Whereupon the typical phalanx could only move forward and backward, with support light infantry it could fare well, but was still outmaneuvred by the legions due to its rigidness, since the Roman was also flexible it could surround and outflank the Phalanx. This is of course only taking account of the infantry melee, not about the firepower and cavalry role. The conclusion is you can't blindly assume Qin's army would be outfaught by Macedonian infantry simply because it is not as armoured. Qin emphasized on speed and valour for armour which is one of the reason it was so successful, also Greek military seem to stick to the concept that heavy infantry is always superior to light, thus they never allow the light to engage the combat with the heavy, this is exactly different from China since Chinese manual emphasize the role of light infantry is to outflank the heavy infantry. without through knowledge of Chinese warfare, the Phalanx general could very well be surprised when a light infantry hit its flanks as it was against the general rule.

"I don't think crossbow alone would be enough to win, because Alexander's troops as already said, isn't entirely of phalanx, its his combined arms technique that made him successful. Also, with the exception of missiles I would say that Alexander the Great's troops have superior infantry since they are probably heavier armed and has more shock power. "

"How would Chinese crossbowmen slaughter the palaynx squares if they advance in tortoise formations?"

First of all testudo is a Roman formation not Greek, get that straight. Crossbow would take heavy tole on the Macedonian phalanx because of the poor defense equippment of the time. According to expert studying the crossbow from the terra cota pit, the bolt could rip straight throw the Greek or Macedonian shield with ease at 200 meters. Greek shields would have been easily shattered by Chinese cross-bows  in the bookto "5000 years of Genius - Ancient Chinese Inventions", there explicitly mention that the shield wall would have been easily shattered when it approaches.

The only way that the Phalanx would be successful is if had the ground advantage. But considering they are invading the Qin has the mountainous terrains. Without letting the phalanx getting too close Alexander's tactic of using the Phalanx as a shield and attack with the cavalry would be very difficult to excersice. Manuevres he pulled on the Greek states such as luring the heavy infantry away frwith light ones would have little use since the warring astate military know very well of these tactics. His archers would be outfired, while if he attempt for a surprised campanion charge, it would have been repelled by the Qin vanguard and rear light infantry protection, these units are espcially there to guard against unexpectded attacks preventing the Qin army from ever getting caught off guard. There crossbow bolts would have been deadly against cavalry charges that are not fully armoured, as demonstrated against the Xiongnu cavalry, while those that manage to cross the barrage would have to face the light Qin halberdiers and Ji users especially designed to cut off cavalrymen. So most likely that an initial encouter would have completely caught alexander off guard since he never faced such weaponry and tactics unless he have a through understanding of the ways that Qin faught.

"Cavalry was in use, chariots were phased out in the times of Sun Tzu, so I imagine there wouldn't be any in use."

No in this time chariot is still the dominant weapon, 3rd century is when cavalry actually started to dominate the field. But in contrast to many writers, cavalry already exist before Zhao Wu lin, it was clearly mentioned in the battle of Ma ling in 341 when Pan Juan used his cavalry to pursue Qi.

"The 'parthian shot' was in use practically since the first man with a bow sat on a horse."

horse archery is not as efficient at this time.

"Iron was in use, so was steel (but uncommon). I'm not too sure on the steel actually"

Yes, many historian assume that Qin's victory is due to its low carbon steel weapons which could vcut down the cast bronze and wrought iron of the enemies, but such theories still have yet been proven. Qin's weapon has more bronze, but it was mold cast bronze, its quality is vastly superior to those of the west,  which is hammered, Qin cast bronze's quality is comparable to wrought iron at this stage but easier to forge and decorate. Therefore its incorrect to say that Qin's weapon is inferior.

"I believe common equipment was a 'dagger-axe' polearm, composite bows, and crossbows. "

Yes, Qin used dagger pole arm, but it did not use composite bow, thatwas for archers, Qin foot infantry as with later Chinese armies used the longbow, which had a longer and stronger design than other places at that time.

"Yes, Qin used dagger pole arm, but it did not use composite bow, thatwas for archers"

Typo, it was used for horse archers.

On the longbow comment... do you mean the Qin and other chinese used a non-composite, larger bow on foot? Or is it a very large (compartively) composite bow?

What was the standard armor of the Qin? I imagine it was treated rhino leather lamellar? Iron and bronze would probably be used for elites and officers.

I'm also wondering, what makes cast bronze stronger than hammered bronze? What is the process that makes them different?

It'd also be nice to pull out the 'stats' of the various kingdoms Alexander defeated. Army make-up, weapons and armor, etc.

I doubt the Qin would take such an insult as to be 'given' the right to rule by a barbarian.

I mean barbarian in the 'Hey, you aren't Chinese' term. It just seems pretty implausible for the Qin Huang Di to take a position of submissance to a total stranger.

Would Alexander ever submit to a foreign power?

Persians also considered Greeks barabarians but they didn't make great attempts to overthrow them... at least not to my knowledge.

about the steel used in swords, i remember reading that Hannibal's troops had much stronger and sharper swords than the romans because of a carbon coating that was formed when they were forged.  Maybe this is kinda like what the Chinese had.

Also, what were the Qin's realationships with the kingdoms, would they all have joined to fight off Alexander, or would they have waited until the fighting was over and then attacked whoever had won?

I figure the other kingdoms would just let Qin fight off the 'barbarians' by themselves, then take advantage of a weakened Qin army.

That's entirely speculation though. I just figure that these kingdoms did not feel a sense of ethnic unity to band against Alexander just because he looks different. Maybe a sense of cultural unity, but they were still competing with one another for dominance.

Alexander may be very educated and able in politic, but the Qin state was not a fool either. What make you think that the Qin will ally with Alexander to attack other six states, after all other six states were Chinese while Alex was foreigner(barbarian).

Qin will never acknowledge the supremacy of Alexander, infact if Alex invade he will suffered disastrous defeat because as friend Warhead pointed out that Macedonian army was not superior to the armies of Central Plains and Alex was far away from home while Qin will be fighting on their own soil.

Last thing is that Qin armies were not rabbles or angry mobs, infact most were professional and battle hardened veterans. Qin people also glorify warfare and strength in arms and Qin state also had some most fearsome generals in history.

I think we are assuming that he went back to one of his cities to re-supply and re-equip, then set upon his conquest of China.

If he did push on, mutiny would have been invitable.

I was thinking more in 'fantasy battle' terms. No mutiny or stretched supply lines, just a big arena of combat, like a videogame. Not arena like one stage, but like a big open place for them to go at each other.

My bet's on the Qin

Maybe someone should play 'Age of Empires' and just let us know.

"Also, what were the Qin's realationships with the kingdoms, would they all have joined to fight off Alexander, or would they have waited until the fighting was over and then attacked whoever had won?"

I don't know why you're assuming the otherstates would even be involved, the little army that Alexander brings from such a distance if even able to reach Qin, would have been so weakened that it would merely be treated as a little raid, 10,000 Qin troops which is but a small fraction of the border troops would have been enough to repel the exhausted, disadvantage terrained Alexander.

One seems to forget that in the Qin army, officers are promoted based on merit. In Alex's army, his officers are composed of the nobilities.

For a nation that has the slogan "Shang Shou Gong Zhi Guo" that glorifies warfare, that lives for war, that would rather use more bronze in weapon manufacture than to create pieces of art, Alex is not fighting against some soft Chinese state. He is fighting against a monstrosity in the history of China.

http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=477 - http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php?showtopic=477

A translated documentary about the bronze weapons used by the Qin army.

"Warhead, what is the date of Sun Bing's manual please? "

It would be sometimes around 340 b.c.

"Which states practiced it?"

There is no evidence, miliatry tactic isn't the work of one man, Sun Bing's manual is just a generalization of the tactics back then, Sun Bing didn't invent them, it was already invented and Sun Bing is the one tha tpracticed it. Of course, individual has their own experience, and so do other generals.

I think that the Qin will kick Alex's ass since the Chinese had gotten at least two thousand years of military history at the time of the Spring and Autumn period there are like over a thousand military tactics and Alexander only depends on numbers and formation he won't matched

If Alexander use 300,000 troops the Qin can wipe it out with 50,000

Remember Qin Shi Huang Di was one of the most brilliant military leader in history and the Qin got a good economy

"Alexander...only using numbers?  May I remind you that his (circa) 35,000 men defeated a Persian force of about 50,000 at Granicus, then about 150,000 at Issus, a similar force at Gaugamela, then, with about 50,000 men he defeated a similar force at Jhellum (Hysdaspe). 

I doubt that any Chinese general could match Alexander for military genius - as no general, until those who used the tactics which Alexander inveted, could improvise as quickly, and as effectively as him."

Do not compare the state of Qin to the "inferior and barbaric" Persia known in China. Alexander did not invent military tactics. The Chinese had their own versions of military tactics far more sophisticated and advanced than Alexandar's especailly after a thousand years of conflict and war between different feudal states. Wu Ji Sui's Wu army defeated Chu's army of 300,000 with a force of 100,000 is one of the thousand examples of winning a battle that ur outnumbered. China, by that time, already had different versions of war manuals and tactics developed and put in books as records and reference.

China also had superior military technology such as the seige weapons (i.e. cross bows) while Alexandar, on the other hand, only had arches, infantry, and calvary.

In terms of military tactic,s the chinese were definitely more advanced.

For example, there were tactics of beauty, pyschological warfare etc that the west had not heard of.

Sun Bing, Sun Zhi, Wu Zhi Sui were all military and tactics experts better than Alexandar. Ancient Chinese military not only relied on tactics during battle but also strategy and psychology. Along with Chinese's superior technology. Alexandar was no match against China. The Qin state by that time already had steel technology that could produce long and steel swords and weapons. Alexandar's force used short iron swords that were not match against the Chinese steels.

The Qin state could easily defeat a combined force of Alexandar and the Persian military. And, that's only one of the seven major states of China. The State of Chu, Chi, and Chin were all so powerful that each of them could deploy an army of 300,000 plus and other smaller states could deploy an army of 100,000.

The Chinese was technological superior, they outnumber the Greeks and the Persians, they had sophisticated war manuals and military formation as well as structure, they were experts in military strategy not limited to tacts during battles.

on the other hand, the West (including Alexandar and Persia) mainly focused on the tactics during battles and had inferior technology.

How could they win?

The Qin state had a standing army of 700,000 while conquering other six kingdoms.

"The same army which was destroyed by the 'barbaric' armies of the north centuries later? "

The barbaric force that conquered China was the Mongols, and it happened some 1500 years after the Qin. What does that have to do with anything? The Mongol also obtained firepower, cannons, and fire armed when capturing Northern China. They then applied this technology to its westward expansion, which went all the way to Europe.

"I've read Sun Zu (well parts of it..it was extremely obvious and dry), and if that's what you mean by strategy of war, "

Sun Zhi once stated "anyone could read the war manual but not everyone can get anything out of it. The knowledge behind the manual has to be interpreted by one that's talented about it. The war manual is not a dead thing to read but an area that one needs to explore." All Chinese generals read the war manual but not everyone was good at using it. But Sun Zhi, Ng Zhi Sui, Zhu Gor Lian are all some examples of famous tacticians. Pschological warfare was common in China during that time while it was unheard in the west in the same time frame.

"An army of that size presents numerous problems.  The logistical problems of fielding an army of that size in any one location is impossible, even for the Qin.  I also doubt that that army has been worked on by historians of today - you probably took that from a source, which most probably inflated the numbers.  In any case, the Qin would have probably only been able to field an army of 200,000 or 300,000 (using those numbers) against Alexander, and Alexander had a history of defeating enemies of that size - with considerable ease."

The Qin deployed an amry of 500,000 when conquering the state of Zhao. And, the feudal states frequently defeated a large army of 300,000+ throughout the history of spring and autumn and warring state. The Qin also executed an entire Zhao army of 400,000 after the Zhao army surrendered.

"On top of that, Han success in Vietnam and the Korean peninsula, as well as against the tribes of the Steppes, was very limited, and many times did poorly - and I doubt the Qin's were much better than the Hans."

Who said they did poorly? Han was the most powerful empire on earth of the time. It also defeated the Huns in the north. The Turks in the west. The Muslim region of north western China today was first conquered by the Han in Ancient time. And the rest of the west (central asia), Korea, Japan sent tributes to the Emperor in return of military protection.

"Most likely Alexander would have been able to ally, or at least guarantee the neutrality, of the other six Chinese factions, which would have only added pressure on the Qin's borders, forcing them to keep men on guard on those frontiers, severely limiting the amount of men he could have switched to fight against Alexander.  "

What makes you think the Chinese would ally with the Aliens they considered as being inferior and barbaric? The Chinese feudal states, although constantly fought against each other, did ally from times to times to launch campaign against barbaric tribes such as the Xiongnu (huns) in the north.

"In short, I would foresee a Macedonian victory."

A combined force of all the rest of the known world would not be able to defeat a combined forced of all the seven feudal chou states at the time due to tenhnological inferiority and lack of productivitiy. The Qin soldiers used steel weapons while Alexandar's soldiers used iron weapons. The Qin soldiers used crossbows while Alexandar's soldiers used archies. The Qin soldiers had sophisticated seige weapons that've been modified several times throughout the history of Spring and Autumn and Waring States while Alexandar came up with some seige weapons designed by himself. 

Besides, there was no large-scale contact between Chin and India due to the terrain and mountains that seperated them. The first contact was made during the Han dynasty. Buddhism didn't spread to China until the age of division, some 700 years after the Qin. The Indian version of warfare was completely different from China's.