Ancient Kings & Myth's

Krowmaet · 11-25-2006, 06:48 AM

Well you know i always wondered, these ancient kings and myths like Alexander and Achilles. Let's be realistic, did they always stand on there great walls to watch the batte or from a distance? Coz tbh you can be as skilled as you wanna be, but in real you got the same chance of survival like the soldiers running around. King, barbarian, Gladiator, name it. But in a battle in those days it doesn't matter what or how strong or skilled or whatever you are, coz the moment you get 1 arrow through your veines, it's over. So i wonder, where they all big pussys standing on there walls and letting there army do the job?

Ofcourse these men would be more powerfull then a single unit, but put any king or whatever on the front line and he's waisted

heman · 11-25-2006, 08:07 AM

well i know for sure Alexander was on the front line with his men not all the time but he did go in when need be and Achilles was a merc he never lead any amry he was just a hero on the front line

TurQ · 11-25-2006, 10:31 AM

Its not as simple as that of "Survival". Believe it or not, military hasn't changed dramatically since the ancient roman empire. People are needed on the "High and Mighty" wall, not because their military masterminds.. but simply for the sake of order. During full out war, (when the proverbial shit hits the fan) and swords are swinging (or guns blazing), those guys "on the wall" are responsible for order and NOT letting their men produce chaos.

Niord · 11-25-2006, 11:22 AM

Well first, we do not know Achilles actually existed. As for Alexander, he was more then willing to engage in the thick of the battle. That's one reason historians are always amazed he lived so long, as well as his famous horse Bucephalus. I think it is awesome that Alexander would charge in with his calvary.

TurQ has the gist of it though, the "people up on the wall" are not necessarily cowards; they are there to maintain order and discpline and to change tactics to adapt to the enemies manuevers. It's a necessary and often under-rated role considering the impact it can have on a battle. One of the reasons Alexander was such an amazing commander was because he was able to almost immediately comprehend any change in tactics by his enemies and then adapt to them despite not being "on the wall."

As for other Kings and Commanders, it really depends on the person as well as on the order and discpline of the army being commanded. Spartacus was most likely a "thick of the battle" commander, and as a gladiator, had been engaged in personal combat numerous times; while someone like Napolean was obviously an "on the wall" general. Either one is not necessarily better than the other, and as military battles have grown in numbers and the variety of units available has increased the need for the "on the wall" general has grown to a requirement for any battle or campaign.

That's just my two cents. I'm sure there are some people on here who know a lot more about military strategy, history, and command than me. Hope what I have helps.

Exo · 11-25-2006, 11:29 AM

Also if the King or Commander actually did have to engage enemies on the front lines, he had 20 men watching his back. Every other soldier had to fend for themselves, or maybe had 1 or 2 guys that may step in to protect them. You better bet that when the king was in the fray all the surrounding men had a corner of their eye pinned on the king to see if he needed aid. So he had less chance of being stabbed in the back, and many would probably take an arrow for him.

Tarquinius · 11-26-2006, 06:17 AM

hey guys, dont forget ceasar...

Ceasar was a superior commander, and a fighter. He was first of all a man who just stod on the wall and commanded his troops. But when he realised that his troops needed new inspiration, he walked straight to the frontlines and inspired his troops to victory. If you think of all Ceasars battles, you can see that he is a great commander...

1. Battle against a german Warlord, dont remeber exactly but I think that he had not so many troops as the germans, but still he wins against these guys who is like 2 meters and not afraid to die.

2. Spain. Ceasar needed to keep his back cleared and marched aganst spain to clear out all Pompeius legions there. Its particular one battle I remember. Against a town or something. He takes out pompeius best generals and troops with almost no losses. When other troops in Spain hear this, they flee, or join ceasars troops.

3. Pomeius... One of ceasars greates victories. Surrounded in greece. Pompeius had twice as much infantry as ceasar, and 7000 thounsand cavalry units while ceasar has like 2000 or someting. Ceasar came out victrious... with a master trick or two

4. Africa... Manage to survie a siege from the egytians who lasts in halv a year. It was under this siege that the Libery of Alexandria where put on fire.

5. Africa again... against Scipio and a African king (dont remember his name) Ceasar comes out victorius again...

Under Ceasars time the Roman Empire had conqured: Galia, some of Germania, Spain, Britania ( yes he was up there, nothing extrodinary, the british wasnt orginised at this time), Greece, Africa...

A great commmander... Some compares him with Alexander.

Ps:
-sry if I have told anything worng :P just told what I remembered from my head xD
-Sry for spelling errors to xD

Krowmaet · 11-26-2006, 06:40 AM

Well morale whas a big part of the outcome i think, and ye people do need to strategys the battle. But (example Troy movie) when he went first in and taken out the beach, he whas standing there and everybody whas yelling Achilles! God that must be a insane feeling, but anyway knowing such a "hero" whas on your side did pump up the soldier's morale.

DunWolf · 11-26-2006, 10:29 AM

I always liked the movie Excalibur. Towards the end, when Arthur's side needed a morale boost, who should show up, but the greatest and best knight of them all, Lancelot. That's what I want for myself in AOC. I might not be a king or a great leader, but when the proverbial shit starts to hit the fan DW shows up with banner in hand and gathers everyone together for one last push forward.

*Said in the Lady's Man voice* Yeah, that would be nice."

Dufnial · 11-26-2006, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DunWolf

I always liked the movie Excalibur. Towards the end, when Arthur's side needed a morale boost, who should show up, but the greatest and best knight of them all, Lancelot. That's what I want for myself in AOC. I might not be a king or a great leader, but when the proverbial shit starts to hit the fan DW shows up with banner in hand and gathers everyone together for one last push forward.

*Said in the Lady's Man voice* Yeah, that would be nice."

lol i know what im doing when i play... watch the troops run in and get started while im using my bow.. if anything happens jump down from the wall and get in the thick of it with an axe or two

nothing like one of the leaders running into battle to bring morale up...

Fenris-Wolf · 11-26-2006, 12:05 PM

"So i wonder, where they all big pussys standing on there walls and letting there army do the job?"

As too who lead from the front and who watched from the rear, really depended on what culture you came from and what period of time you lived in. As a general rule the further in history you go, the less likely you were to do your own fighting.

In more Celtic/Germanic and war-like cultures it was very common to join the front ranks of your troops at appropriate moments; as king/general were concidered to be the strongest man present, it was (in theory) the reason you led and you were sometimes obliged to prove it.

In ancient Rome, especially the early Republic period, young officers were expected to be the first one through a broken gate or over a breached wall; that was how they earned honors and gain status and promotion. Thus, many older officers in the back row were the 'well-bred' men who survived the stunts of there youth.

One thing that you have to keep in mind though, is that anything in history that you read about a "king" is going to be highly embelished by the author; whether your deifying a national hero centuries later or vilifying todays enemy that will always be the case. Someone mentioned Julius Caesar in an early post; I'd like to point out that 90% of what we know about Julius comes from Julius' own journals, thus written by the man himself! Or was written after his death when his 'godhood' was had be sanctioned by the government.

So, to bring this long ass post to a close and address the second part of the premise: "Of course these men would be more powerfull then a single unit, put any king or whatever on the front line and he's waisted"..... No, they would have been just as human as everybody else. The advantages they would have had would be better arms, equipment and training (if they were career military leaders) and a troop of loyal followers devoted to keeping them alive; all of which would of upped their chances of surviving on the front line.

11-25-2006, 06:48 AM	#1 (permalink)
Krowmaet Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tatooine Posts: 238	Ancient Kings & Myth's Well you know i always wondered, these ancient kings and myths like Alexander and Achilles. Let's be realistic, did they always stand on there great walls to watch the batte or from a distance? Coz tbh you can be as skilled as you wanna be, but in real you got the same chance of survival like the soldiers running around. King, barbarian, Gladiator, name it. But in a battle in those days it doesn't matter what or how strong or skilled or whatever you are, coz the moment you get 1 arrow through your veines, it's over. So i wonder, where they all big pussys standing on there walls and letting there army do the job? Ofcourse these men would be more powerfull then a single unit, but put any king or whatever on the front line and he's waisted __________________ Oh! Look at the girl in the pink yo. ___________________________ Kill 1 man and your a murderer, kill a thousand and your a king, kill a million and your God!

11-25-2006, 08:07 AM	#2 (permalink)
heman Linux Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Australia Posts: 687	well i know for sure Alexander was on the front line with his men not all the time but he did go in when need be and Achilles was a merc he never lead any amry he was just a hero on the front line __________________ Last edited by heman; 11-25-2006 at 08:09 AM.

11-25-2006, 11:22 AM	#4 (permalink)
Niord Registered Users Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Philly Posts: 136	Well first, we do not know Achilles actually existed. As for Alexander, he was more then willing to engage in the thick of the battle. That's one reason historians are always amazed he lived so long, as well as his famous horse Bucephalus. I think it is awesome that Alexander would charge in with his calvary. TurQ has the gist of it though, the "people up on the wall" are not necessarily cowards; they are there to maintain order and discpline and to change tactics to adapt to the enemies manuevers. It's a necessary and often under-rated role considering the impact it can have on a battle. One of the reasons Alexander was such an amazing commander was because he was able to almost immediately comprehend any change in tactics by his enemies and then adapt to them despite not being "on the wall." As for other Kings and Commanders, it really depends on the person as well as on the order and discpline of the army being commanded. Spartacus was most likely a "thick of the battle" commander, and as a gladiator, had been engaged in personal combat numerous times; while someone like Napolean was obviously an "on the wall" general. Either one is not necessarily better than the other, and as military battles have grown in numbers and the variety of units available has increased the need for the "on the wall" general has grown to a requirement for any battle or campaign. That's just my two cents. I'm sure there are some people on here who know a lot more about military strategy, history, and command than me. Hope what I have helps. __________________ "I live, I burn with life, I love, I slay, and am content." -- Conan in "Queen of the Black Coast," REH.

11-25-2006, 11:29 AM	#5 (permalink)
Exo Kills and stuff Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tennessee Posts: 416	Also if the King or Commander actually did have to engage enemies on the front lines, he had 20 men watching his back. Every other soldier had to fend for themselves, or maybe had 1 or 2 guys that may step in to protect them. You better bet that when the king was in the fray all the surrounding men had a corner of their eye pinned on the king to see if he needed aid. So he had less chance of being stabbed in the back, and many would probably take an arrow for him. __________________

11-26-2006, 06:40 AM	#7 (permalink)
Krowmaet Registered User Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Tatooine Posts: 238	Well morale whas a big part of the outcome i think, and ye people do need to strategys the battle. But (example Troy movie) when he went first in and taken out the beach, he whas standing there and everybody whas yelling Achilles! God that must be a insane feeling, but anyway knowing such a "hero" whas on your side did pump up the soldier's morale. __________________ Oh! Look at the girl in the pink yo. ___________________________ Kill 1 man and your a murderer, kill a thousand and your a king, kill a million and your God!

11-25-2006, 10:31 AM	#3 (permalink)
TurQ Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: New York City Posts: 756	Its not as simple as that of "Survival". Believe it or not, military hasn't changed dramatically since the ancient roman empire. People are needed on the "High and Mighty" wall, not because their military masterminds.. but simply for the sake of order. During full out war, (when the proverbial shit hits the fan) and swords are swinging (or guns blazing), those guys "on the wall" are responsible for order and NOT letting their men produce chaos.

11-26-2006, 06:17 AM	#6 (permalink)
Tarquinius Registered User Join Date: May 2006 Location: Norway Posts: 72	hey guys, dont forget ceasar... Ceasar was a superior commander, and a fighter. He was first of all a man who just stod on the wall and commanded his troops. But when he realised that his troops needed new inspiration, he walked straight to the frontlines and inspired his troops to victory. If you think of all Ceasars battles, you can see that he is a great commander... 1. Battle against a german Warlord, dont remeber exactly but I think that he had not so many troops as the germans, but still he wins against these guys who is like 2 meters and not afraid to die. 2. Spain. Ceasar needed to keep his back cleared and marched aganst spain to clear out all Pompeius legions there. Its particular one battle I remember. Against a town or something. He takes out pompeius best generals and troops with almost no losses. When other troops in Spain hear this, they flee, or join ceasars troops. 3. Pomeius... One of ceasars greates victories. Surrounded in greece. Pompeius had twice as much infantry as ceasar, and 7000 thounsand cavalry units while ceasar has like 2000 or someting. Ceasar came out victrious... with a master trick or two 4. Africa... Manage to survie a siege from the egytians who lasts in halv a year. It was under this siege that the Libery of Alexandria where put on fire. 5. Africa again... against Scipio and a African king (dont remember his name) Ceasar comes out victorius again... Under Ceasars time the Roman Empire had conqured: Galia, some of Germania, Spain, Britania ( yes he was up there, nothing extrodinary, the british wasnt orginised at this time), Greece, Africa... A great commmander... Some compares him with Alexander. Ps: -sry if I have told anything worng :P just told what I remembered from my head xD -Sry for spelling errors to xD

11-26-2006, 10:29 AM	#8 (permalink)
DunWolf Banned Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Tarantia Posts: 2,286	I always liked the movie Excalibur. Towards the end, when Arthur's side needed a morale boost, who should show up, but the greatest and best knight of them all, Lancelot. That's what I want for myself in AOC. I might not be a king or a great leader, but when the proverbial shit starts to hit the fan DW shows up with banner in hand and gathers everyone together for one last push forward. Said in the Lady's Man voice Yeah, that would be nice."

11-26-2006, 12:05 PM	#10 (permalink)
Fenris-Wolf Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,092	"So i wonder, where they all big pussys standing on there walls and letting there army do the job?" As too who lead from the front and who watched from the rear, really depended on what culture you came from and what period of time you lived in. As a general rule the further in history you go, the less likely you were to do your own fighting. In more Celtic/Germanic and war-like cultures it was very common to join the front ranks of your troops at appropriate moments; as king/general were concidered to be the strongest man present, it was (in theory) the reason you led and you were sometimes obliged to prove it. In ancient Rome, especially the early Republic period, young officers were expected to be the first one through a broken gate or over a breached wall; that was how they earned honors and gain status and promotion. Thus, many older officers in the back row were the 'well-bred' men who survived the stunts of there youth. One thing that you have to keep in mind though, is that anything in history that you read about a "king" is going to be highly embelished by the author; whether your deifying a national hero centuries later or vilifying todays enemy that will always be the case. Someone mentioned Julius Caesar in an early post; I'd like to point out that 90% of what we know about Julius comes from Julius' own journals, thus written by the man himself! Or was written after his death when his 'godhood' was had be sanctioned by the government. So, to bring this long ass post to a close and address the second part of the premise: "Of course these men would be more powerfull then a single unit, put any king or whatever on the front line and he's waisted"..... No, they would have been just as human as everybody else. The advantages they would have had would be better arms, equipment and training (if they were career military leaders) and a troop of loyal followers devoted to keeping them alive; all of which would of upped their chances of surviving on the front line. Last edited by Fenris-Wolf; 11-26-2006 at 12:09 PM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode