|
Post by Azrael on Feb 8, 2014 22:31:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Feb 9, 2014 10:51:25 GMT -5
I got a tad bored with the fights in Spartacus, some were good, some were the same old, but that final season was definitely a string-puller with those decisive battles.
|
|
|
Post by Azrael on Feb 9, 2014 11:27:00 GMT -5
well when I saw him just beast mode running up that hill after marcus I was blown away that was awesome
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Feb 9, 2014 18:48:14 GMT -5
True, true, that was a good scene, I was so sure that they would defy history and win, that the producers wanted a different outcome, then..
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Feb 10, 2014 1:16:45 GMT -5
It's cool how he kills so many people. I mean, he just runs into a cohort, and suddenly they all run away and he gets to fight them 1-on-1. And even then he just takes them out like they were baby seals. I mean come on, gladiators weren't that good
|
|
|
Post by Dante on Feb 10, 2014 18:54:54 GMT -5
It's just a show, calm your tizzles.
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Feb 11, 2014 1:47:45 GMT -5
JKJKJK bro. calm your tizzle-calming tizzles.
|
|
|
Post by Firelin on Feb 12, 2014 10:04:57 GMT -5
dude you know that the gladiators did get harder training then the romans soldiers the romans are strong if they are in formation but if they got separated they where fucked
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Feb 12, 2014 10:49:51 GMT -5
look up how and how long the roman soldiers trained, i double dare you
|
|
|
Post by Kohath on Feb 12, 2014 11:11:16 GMT -5
Firelin has a point. The Romans were extremely well trained, but only in formation and in numbers. One on one, the gladiators had much more experience, and flexibility. But, one must not forget that Romans had armour that was designed to prevent damage, which the gladiators did not. Third, the gladiators were trained to make a show, to have their victim live long enough in the arena for the enjoyment of the crowd. The Romans were trained to kill quickly and effectively.
So, if there were more than one Roman soldier, I would say that the Romans would win. As in this battle. But, if he could actually manage to single every one out, and precision striking beneath and over their armour, a gladiator could win I suppose.
|
|
|
Post by Varangian on Feb 12, 2014 11:19:22 GMT -5
Gladiators might've been superior 1-on-1, but it still doesn't mean that they were monsters able to cut a regular legionary to pieces within seconds.
|
|
|
Post by Darin on Feb 12, 2014 11:28:56 GMT -5
Very true. One thing to note is that it's actually a lot more likely that a 1 on 1 fight could end within seconds in later periods. Like Varangian said, a Roman soldier wouldn't have been a easy target to kill, though a Gladiator might have had the upper hand, the fight would most likely last longer then a few seconds. Now in the middle ages, the average knight could have easily killed a militia/levy in a mater of seconds in a 1 on 1 fight, but again, that's due to the lack of/poor training of the militia/levy in 1 on 1 combat, and the fact that knights were on average well trained. Being more specific, some knights would have been very highly trained while some not so much. But like I said, on average a knight would have been well trained.
|
|
|
Post by Otttiger on Feb 12, 2014 16:00:52 GMT -5
We can all argue about how good this persons training would supposedly be, or how good their armor would be, but we will never actually know because the people who trained and were trained to be legionnaires or gladiators are dead. We do admittedly have people who Role play and stuff, but because they are not to the death, these people can't get the real feeling for how it was. Something else you guys aren't giving any credit to is age, personalities, knowledge of fighting, experience, and flat out will to survive and kill. I personally think that the Legionnaire would win 8/10 times. Just because of his armor, weapons, and training.(again, this is in theory) The Roman Soldiers were indeed trained to be the ultimate fighting unit as a team, but they were expected to become separated. What fool would think that out of 20 soldiers, or even 10, that at least 1 person wouldn't get separated. As stated previously, these people were trained to kill quickly, meticulously, and efficiently. While the gladiator was supposed to put on a show. Do you guys know how long an average gladiator match would take compared to lets say the 3rd cohort fighting a couple hundred Gallic tribesman? Gladiators would usually fight to wound and make the other Gladiator unable to fight. The crowd and 'Editor' were the people who would decide whether the Gladiator lived or died. Accidents did happen. The Legions would kill their enemies quickly and without mercy, so a gladiator may be able to inflict some pretty grievous wounds on the Roman Legionnaire and possible kill him, but the gladiator may or may not fall back on his training and attempt to only wound the Roman, While the Roman is trying to gut him quickly.
|
|
Gandhi
Clan Retired Member
Posts: 196
|
Post by Gandhi on Feb 12, 2014 20:10:15 GMT -5
God this is the queerest argument I've ever witnessed, just stop
|
|
|
Post by Darin on Feb 12, 2014 22:16:23 GMT -5
People can discuss this if they want, just because you don't understand what anyone is talking about doesn't make it pointless/stupid. No one asked you to read or post.
|
|