deadliest warrior
- Thread starter demon of humanity
- Start date
Give him a break, he's still understandable, unlike others who forget punctuation and capital letters. Do I need to remind you of the user 007 who used to be around quite a while back, and was not only grammatically limited, but also unintelligible even though he often posted only single sentences of four or so words?
And frankly, I find certain tl; dr posters on this site a lot more headache inducing than him.
And frankly, I find certain tl; dr posters on this site a lot more headache inducing than him.
To be fair, samurai weapons aren't designed to deal with sturdy enough shields. A samurai bases himself on taking down the enemy in one hit, and generally they only have to worry about very flimsy, non-metal armor. While Spartan shields were, IIRC, made of bronze, they were still tougher than anything Japan had to offer in the way of light, portable armor. And a katana is a terrible weapon to take to a shield.
Also, for the record, OP isn't of English mother language. That's why I said give him a break.
Also, for the record, OP isn't of English mother language. That's why I said give him a break.
Note the particular samurai armor they showed was steel plate it was also ancient hell they tested a spartan spear and the spear bent when it impacted that armor. But it looked more designed for movement and quickness rather than defense unlike spartans which there bronze armor and shield was designed for defense.
still samurai fared better than spartans first opponent the ninja
still samurai fared better than spartans first opponent the ninja
In terms of better strategist, Alexander, no contest.
Better warrior? Attila, very likely. He was always at the head of his armies, and participated actively in battles (as a Hun king, he had to, or he'd lose his men's respect), while Alexander was rarely in the frontlines, and one such occasion was what ultimately killed him (it was a combination of an infected wound and dysentery, according to reports).
Better warrior? Attila, very likely. He was always at the head of his armies, and participated actively in battles (as a Hun king, he had to, or he'd lose his men's respect), while Alexander was rarely in the frontlines, and one such occasion was what ultimately killed him (it was a combination of an infected wound and dysentery, according to reports).