Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Topic: The best medieval unit Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 06:30 |
Now which is the best
|
 |
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 07:17 |
mmmh, what are Teutonic archers and Golden Mamelukes?
|
 |
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 07:18 |
sorry, TEUTONIC KNIGHTS
and Golden Mamelukes, the nobles of Egypt and Syria, with lances and they wore golden armour, you may take them as Mamelukes.
|
 |
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 07:22 |
you mean the Khassaki?
|
 |
fastspawn
Earl
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 11:02 |
SInce Mongols thrased every army they met during this time period, and since the Keshiks are the imperial guard. I cast my vote.
|
 |
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 11:22 |
Well, for me it is a hard decision of Byzantine Cataphract or Tuetonic knight, I am going to vote Cataphract though because Tuetonic Knights' as far as I can imagine wore so much armor that if they were knocked down they would probably be out of the fight
So Cataphract then
|
 |
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 11:33 |
now, did the byzantines call them cataphtactorii(armoured horsemen)???
|
 |
Degredado
Consul
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 366
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 12:58 |
Originally posted by Huitzilopochtli
because Tuetonic Knights' as far as I can imagine wore so much armor that if they were knocked down they would probably be out of the fight |
I have a feeling that this is a myth
|
Vou votar nas putas. Estou farto de votar nos filhos delas
|
 |
demon
Chieftain
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Brazil
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1185
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 13:28 |
I said mongol archers speculating that the author meant mongolic cavarly archer
|
Grrr..
|
 |
Imperator Invictus
Caliph
Retired AE Administrator
Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3151
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 14:07 |
Some of the units didn't coexist at the same time as others did! The
Byzantine Katapractoi was the best equipted heavy cavalry of its time,
but didn't last into the time of other units, like the Longbowman or
even later knights.
|
 |
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 14:15 |
yes, cavalry archers, and from the Kataphractii, then didnt they exist in 12th century...
|
 |
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 14:27 |
MOngol archer cavalry was by far the most superior, I like the Keshiks more for cool armor but in terms of effectiveness range and mobility reign supreme over armor and brute force.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
 |
warhead
General
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 15:39 |
I would like to correct the myth of the mongol supierority in army, no record whatsoever mentioned that their archery, organization,, discipline or armament than any other previous nomads that dominated mongolia, there is no reason just because they were more successful to suppose that their army is of supieror quality than others, there are many occasion when mongol armies were beaten by inferior odds too and vise versa, it all depend on the commander and thats one of the rason the mongol army was successful.
|
 |
warhead
General
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 760
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 15:47 |
Also what is the time frame covered for this "Medeval", if its up to 1500, then I would say Ottoman since their firearm troops by that time was the most developed and trained.
If its before firearms, then its virtually impossible to decide since many of the armies were equippted with the same thing and both won and lost battles throughout.
|
 |
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 19:29 |
I had to choose between Mongol Archers and English Longbowmen. I chose the Mongols because in the end they were more successful that the Longbowmen who although devastating to the French, weren't able to totally defeat them.
|
Member of IAEA
|
 |
fastspawn
Earl
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Singapore
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 269
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 19-Aug-2004 at 21:30 |
I think the mongols have got their vote split between the keshik's and
the "mongol archers" since technically the keshiks were also mongol
archers and were the imperial guard
|
 |
boody4
Samurai
Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Location: Poland
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 130
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 20-Aug-2004 at 21:23 |
Polish Hussars.
|
 |
Tonifranz
Janissary
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Aug-2004 at 06:42 |
The English Longbowmen. They were the defining weapon of the Hundred Years' War and gave England it's military reputation during the Middle Ages.
|
 |
rider
Tsar
Suspended
Joined: 09-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4664
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 21-Aug-2004 at 11:45 |
Originally posted by boody4
Polish Hussars. |
i like it...
|
 |
Mosquito
Caliph
Suspended
Joined: 05-Aug-2004
Location: Sarmatia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2537
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 22-Aug-2004 at 00:42 |
Originally posted by boody4
Polish Hussars. |
They were not medieval.
|
 |