Deepcrush wrote:Don't get mad at me for your responses.
Oh, you know I'm not mad. I love you, Deep.
Mikey wrote:I understand what you're saying about the Comanche, but I believe you're undervaluing the Mongols at the same time, especially if they get to CQ while still mounted. There's no Comanche (or any Native American Nation) weapon that can stay in a cut as long as an Asian yatagan precursor.
Yeah, I agree that there's no chance for the Comanche if the Mongol gets in close. The show really doesn't seem to use tactics and terrain advantage in their analysis, though. I guarantee that any Comanche worth his salt wouldn't get that close with an armored opponent.
There is only one way of avoiding the war – that is the overthrow of this society. However, as we are too weak for this task, the war is inevitable. -L. Trotsky, 1939
Tsukiyumi wrote:Oh, you know I'm not mad. I love you, Deep.
I know, but you started to cross that line so I had to slap you back to the IQ realm.
Tsukiyumi wrote:Yeah, I agree that there's no chance for the Comanche if the Mongol gets in close. The show really doesn't seem to use tactics and terrain advantage in their analysis, though. I guarantee that any Comanche worth his salt wouldn't get that close with an armored opponent.
Its not just about being up close. Even at range the Mongol has an advantage.
Tsukiyumi wrote:It probably won't end up on horseback, anyways, and there, the Comanche has the advantage of size and ferocity.
Size and ferocity won't stop them being turned into a pincushion at 200 yards. Unless I'm mistaken, the Comanche only even had short bows, which are only effective to 100ish yards. Mongol compound bows were as powerful as the English longbow, but compact enough to be used from horseback.
Only two things are infinite - the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe: Albert Einstein.
I have to admit to a fondness of the Longbow. While I've heard of the Mongol recurve bows, and even used some recurves, they were never as powerful as the longbow IMO. Though I fully understand the need for them when shooting from horseback.
The big problem Comanche vs. Mongol is that you're pitting a stone age culture vs. an iron age one. In the kind of set ups they do that's not going to end very well. While a Comanche's weapons were effective when they start comparing them one on one with a mongol and their gear it's going to be ugly.
Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel,
KGB vs. CIA,
Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commando
Those are my best bets for close fights. Some of the others I don't know enough about to judge and others Jesse James gang vs. Capone's gang will be ugly.
Tyyr wrote:Somali Pirate vs. Medellin Cartel,
KGB vs. CIA,
Navy Seal vs. Israeli Commando
Yeah, these are going to be tough calls. I need to wait and see what kind of kit they're getting.
Tyyr wrote:Those are my best bets for close fights. Some of the others I don't know enough about to judge and others Jesse James gang vs. Capone's gang will be ugly.
This is about as one sided a fight as you get. Not sure what producer thought this match up would be a good one.
Captain Seafort wrote:Really? How about French Army vs 22 SAS?
That's better.
Didn't they do this on an episode of Ultimate Force?
"You ain't gonna get off down the trail a mile or two, and go missing your wife or something, like our last cook done, are you?"
"My wife is in hell, where I sent her. She could make good biscuits, but her behavior was terrible."
kostmayer wrote:Didn't they do this on an episode of Ultimate Force?
Who?
Captain Seafort wrote:The French have guns. For all their habit of loosing, putting them against 22 SAS would involve a fight. A one-sided fight, but a fight nonetheless.
I doubt a fight... More like a rout, but not a fight.
Captain Seafort wrote:Besides, the French army includes the Foreign Legion.
Credit where credit is due, the French are at least smart enough to look outside their own population for soldiers...
