Viking vs Roman Centurion
This is a simpler thread than some of my previous comparisons, you just tell me from your own knowledge who you think has the upper hand. Treat every scenario differently, please.
Viking armor: Chain mail (entire body), leather (torso), steel helmet.
Viking shield: Large, round wooden shield.
Viking weapons: Viking longsword, Dane axe, Viking spear, dagger.
Centurion armor: Steel laminar armor (torso and shoulders), steel helmet.
Centurion shield: Large, rectangular iron shield.
Centurion weapons: Gladius, Dolabra, Pilum.
Scenario 1 - Single combat: In an amphitheatre-style arena, a Nordic Viking and a Roman Centurion face off in single combat. The warriors start at a 30 m distance and have maximum preparation for battle (including the Viking to enter a battle trance and the Centurion to work out strategy).
Scenario 2 - Group fighting: 5 Vikings and 5 Centurions face each other in the same fashion as above.
Scenario 3 - Army battle: A Viking army of 1,000 men march ashore in Italy, and face an army of 1,000 Roman Centurions in the fields outside an undefended settlement. The Romans get 5 Scorpions but no preparation, while the Vikings have maximum preparation but no artillery.
WHO WILL WIN?
My own conclusions:
Re: Viking vs Roman Centurion
Well Army would all depend on the man leading it.
The romans were strong but the wooden shuild will help absorb the vibration on contact. More then the steel will unless renforced with like lether or wood in it. As for the armour, it doesn't matter, chain mail is and steel is all weak.
This wil lsolve this all, are there any archers? Because if only romans did then they win, becaus ewith the long boy knights or any armour becoems weak. because arrows benetrait throw chainmail. They ar ment to stop a blade but it really depends
|All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:11 PM.|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.