Hi! This training not only elevated them to the highest levels of skill, it inculcated in them the irrelevance of pain, and their own lives, and instilled in them an unshakable preference for death before dishonor.
Who were the best soldiers? Spartans vs Zulus
They were slow, inflexible and had pretty limited uses.
You are indeed where you belong. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, More posts from the whowouldwin community. Shaka Zulu's height and weight are not listed. The Mongols had the worlds largest empire but can they take the legendary Comanche Indians who fought the colonist for their territories? Spartans vs Zulus Round 1: The Spartans win. They’re amazing at fighting a specific type of enemy in perfect terrain, I’ll give you that.
I guess what I'm saying is that the Romans would win because it's a "huge battle", something the Romans army had evolved to conquer for hundreds of years.
What we think of as Spartans had some major issues dealing with lightly armored opponents.
Come join our discussions, post your own battles and kick some ass!
I can hardly think any nation which showed less imagination on their tactics and strategies than the Spartans. Romans soldiers received incredible training for a battlefield situation. Cookies help us deliver our Services. First would be the period the Roman Legion is from. How will they catch them in the hot plains of Africa? Response to I’m here waving at you this week because we’re hoping to boost our Supporter count. We’re making steady progress but are coming up about 400 people short!
Spartans vs Zulus
Press J to jump to the feed. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast, More posts from the whowouldwin community.
Who wins? Spartans have better equipment, and they are probably the better warriors. When we removed most of the ads from NG in January, our goal was to hit 4,000 active Supporters in 2020.
From the age they could carry weapons, they trained with them in unrelenting regimens that claimed a great deal of lives, by some accounts as high as one in three or four. The Spartans also have no way of actually engaging the Zulus.
Shaka Zulu's lifetime of 1787-1828 is listed, giving him a lifetime of 40–41 years at death; he did not die of natural causes, being assassinated by his half-brothers. Looks like you're using new Reddit on an old browser. Zulus on the other hand had very little body armour and weaker shields. who was was the best General?
The inability to adapt a ridiculously huge flaw. I think Spartans have technology and military discipline to their advantage against this particular opponent. Response to
The Zulus were a conscript army, wore no armour and were relatively poorly armed. They have better armor, cavalry, better tactics, and far superior training. If you have $3 per month or $25 per year to spare, please consider becoming a Supporter today!
To say they’d beat the majority of melee AND musket troops from all of history is honestly kind of ridiculous... Spartan culture was really something else. Well there aren't any spartans or zulus anymore so I guess we won. share.
Vikings. ... or the British defeat by the Zulus at Isandlwana in KwaZulu-Natal in 1879. 2014-09-06 23:14:04. I wouldn't see it as anyway fair if numbers were equal. This is a no-brainer. You are indeed where you belong.
2014-09-06 21:03:57, Response to Spartans had better armour, including metal shields and often metal helmets and breastplates. The Zulu were taught what their specific group knew (if I'm not mistaken), without the combined knowledge and strategy the Roman army's training would encompass. I have always been fascinated a bit by military history, not only Generalship and tactics, but also by soldiering.
Even if they don’t have the guns, they can kite the Spartans pretty easily. Actually, the Zulus should win without an issue. But there’s a reason they were dropped in favor of superior armies. Insult their honor? I thought OP was referring to Greek Spartans...from Sparta. Spartans had better armour, including metal shields and often metal helmets and breastplates. If this is an encounter sort of scenario, the Zulus could utilize terrain to wear down the Spartans. Zulu weapons, on the other hand, were made from stone (albeit very hard stone), wood, and teeth. Response to The heavy armor will work to their disadvantage in this type of battle. And about those major issues I mentioned: A group of Spartans got ripped apart by Athenians who threw spears at them in hit and runs because they were incapable of retaliating. Shamelessly rip-er, I mean 'inspired' by Goc's Zulus vs Spartans thread.
How does this one go down? Disclaimer: I'm considering only their most important units. Zulu vs Sparta. When I first saw this question I wasn’t sure if it was a serious inquiry.
If you love to imagine the planet-exploding battles of the fictional gods who will never be, taking pointless knowledge gathered from a life spent reading and gaming and swinging it like a gladiator's sword in discussions on reddit... then welcome home, my friend. Spartans vs Zulus Response to
Thanks for watching Leave a like and comment and is always appreciated! If the terrain is flat it works especially well to the Phalanx' advantages and the cavalry/skirmishers can easily be used to protect the flanks. If they just melee it out, the Spartans should come out on top, due to being better armored. What do they do if the enemy doesn’t engage? Spartans vs Zulus I will never understand why people think Phalanxes were the epitome of melee combat. Most Spartan armies were no bigger then 10,000 Hoplites while the Zulu could muster 25 - 30,000 warriors. They really weren't practically equipped for fighting outside their formations because their stuff was too unwieldy. The Spartans were characterized by their Hoplites whereas the Mongols had their super-skilled cavalry archers. Nelson, Shaka, Bonaparte, Khan?
I'm sure that in a small skirmish in a jungle area, or even in a sustained survival situation, the Zulu would have no problem outlasting Romans. Looks like someone needs a geography lesson. Spartans vs Zulus ©Copyright 1995-2020 Newgrounds, Inc. All rights reserved. The 300 Spartans were a minority of the defending force – not just in the army but even in the last stand – but the clash became the battle of the Spartan 300, not the Greek 7,000, in popular imagination. A puzzle game with the goal of using energy particles to charge crystals.
Round 1: both sides have had a spy in the enemy camp for a month and must choose 1000 foot soldiers that will meet the enemy soldiers in a pitched battle.
Response to Spartans vs Zulus 2014-09-06 21:55:37 At 9/6/14 09:37 PM, DM692 wrote: Despite functionally similar equipment, I believe Romans … Press question mark to learn the rest of the keyboard shortcuts. 2014-09-06 21:09:58. Round 2: Battle between all of their soldiers in a giant field. Spartans win easily.
Spartan culture was really something else. The Zulus absolutely had throwing spears.
Their religion, their occupation, and their passion was toughness and war, basically. Zulus on the other hand had very little body armour and weaker shields.
The site may not work properly if you don't, If you do not update your browser, we suggest you visit, Press J to jump to the feed.
They were trained in battlefield tactics and hand-to-hand combat, in addition to being steeled against the intimidation the Zulu so relied on. The Zulu warriors were known for their endurance and use of surprise attacks.