Mongols vs. Romans

[D.B. Cooper]

More timewarping fun:

Say the Mongols, while storming through eastern Europe, ride through a temporal rift which takes them back to 100AD. They quickly orient themselves and decide to continue their campaign against Europe. The Romans, aware of this new threat from the far east, send some legions up to investigate. One thing leads to another and they find themselves doing battle somewhere in eastern Europe. Subutai is at the head of the Mongol forces

Who would win, and could the Mongols tear the Roman empire apart?

My money's on the Mongols.

[bushbush]

i think it would largely depend on which era was the Roman empire in. Was it unified and under a strong leadership? or was it in a civil war and its forces and resources exhausted...

[D.B. Cooper]

Without a doubt Mongols could defeat a Roman army. For clarification what time period of Rome are you talking about?

i think it would largely depend on which era was the Roman empire in. Was it unified and under a strong leadership? or was it in a civil war and its forces and resources exhausted...

100AD.

[nopasties]

Without a doubt Mongols could defeat a Roman army. For clarification what time period of Rome are you talking about?

[bushbush]

Without a doubt Mongols could defeat a Roman army. For clarification what time period of Rome are you talking about?

ex:....augustus? trajan? I am not saying they could 100% defeat the invading mongols, but i would imagine that they would be able to produce an unified and energetic roman force to meet the Mongols, versus what the empire could muster when it was exhausted by repeated civil wars.

[nopasties]

ex:....augustus? trajan? I am not saying they could 100% defeat the invading mongols, but i would imagine that they would be able to produce an unified and energetic roman force to meet the Mongols, versus what the empire could muster when it was exhausted by repeated civil wars.

The tactical advantage of the mongols being lead by Subotai may not be able to conquer an entire Roman Empire but in a battle? I give full advantage to the Mongols unless the Romans could get some tactical suprise or ambush. The Mongol composite bow would render Roman armour useless.

[Seleucid king]

Without a doubt Mongols could defeat a Roman army. For clarification what time period of Rome are you talking about?

ex:....augustus? trajan? I am not saying they could 100% defeat the invading mongols, but i would imagine that they would be able to produce an unified and energetic roman force to meet the Mongols, versus what the empire could muster when it was exhausted by repeated civil wars.

Lol...he said 100 AD.

Also, If the Huns and Parthians could do it, and the Scythians and Sarmatians can do it in RTW, then the Mongols can DEFINETLY do it.

[DekuTrash]

Pesky horse archers could do a number on the legions, what era of the empire are we talking?

[Last Roman]

Without a doubt Mongols could defeat a Roman army. For clarification what time period of Rome are you talking about?

that really depends. Romans were not some pushover, and had dealt with horse based armies before (Parthians and Persians being the prime examples, along with the Sarmatians) Then again, the Mongols were no average army (if under the right leader)

[Aetius]

Mongols>Romans


Just look at Carrhae and magnify that by whatever the Mongols are compared to the Parthians.

[Knight of Heaven]

Mongols>Romans


Just look at Carrhae and magnify that by whatever the Mongols are compared to the Parthians.

Well you forget that the romans sacked the parthian capital several times (ancient babylon), And defeat the parthians more then a few ocasions, that argument alone that the romans legion is unable to face horse archers is not valid. Anyway im thinking on the superb horsemans the mongols have, and its a litle unfair to compare the thecnological advances from both time periods. better armors, better weopons, better ways of working metals. Diferent cavalary tactics, from the medieval period, that for sure, the strategy of cavalary charges is completely diferent then acient times.

Even so if we gonna stick to tactics and strategies, it realy depends of the generals, i will say the romans legions will take an advantage becouse they were very quick to adapt to any kind of situation. i think with great leaders both armies will be unstopable

[Comrade the Colonel]

Romans all the way.

[Gustav21]

Yea I agree with the Carrhae argument. The Parthians trounced the Romans, and they were (IMO) not nearly as skilled or disciplined as the Mongols. It was just be an even bigger massacre is all!

[GreyFox]

Yea I agree with the Carrhae argument. The Parthians trounced the Romans, and they were (IMO) not nearly as skilled or disciplined as the Mongols. It was just be an even bigger massacre is all!

The Parthians trounced the Romans at Carrhae yes, but the Romans also beat the snot out of the Parthians immediately afterwards, and in other battles.

The level of technology makes the difference in the case of the Mongols vs the Romans.

[Comrade the Colonel]

i still think they would have won. The Romans were tough.

[removeduser_052420]

I put my bet on the Mongols

[Comrade the Colonel]

no no no, romans all the way

[CiviC]

Romans could try to resist Mongol archers by forming a testudo, but that's all, Romans don't have the cavalry to engage the fast Mongol horse archers.

But I don't think Mongols can conquer Roman Empire, just devastate it.

[removeduser_052420]

Romans could try to resist Mongol archers by forming a testudo, but that's all, Romans don't have the cavalry to engage the fast Mongol horse archers.

But I don't think Mongols can conquer Roman Empire, just devastate it.

Yeah, this sounds about right.

+ rep

[avesta]

Mongols would probably destroy them if they could find the right ground to fight on. Carrhae was an open field battle with lots of space and desert heat so I'm not sure it's the best example in this case, but it does give you an idea of what cavalry+archer armies can do.