How long would it take for the Romans to conquer Westeros?

Depends what era. You've described the Roman Empire at peak strength, not the bullshit they became by the mid-late Empire with randomly conscripted soldiers who weren't expected to train at all.

Arya wins

The Romans would lose a legion, maybe 2
but here's the thing: the Romans could take those kinds of losses easily
and while losing they would adapt to the technological difference

look up the punic wars, Carthage started out more advanced in those as well

Are you fucking inbred? Do you have any idea the size of a Roman Legion compared to an Army in the war of the roses?

What era of "Romans" are you specifically talking about?

Westeros was like one era behind in terms of warfare.

Hell they don't even have a national conscripted army.

The Roman empire at its peak had 100 million subjects. They would win by sheer attrition alone.

Rome's strength lay in its military organization and logistics. The combat performance of the legions themselves wasnt that special, but the Rome was able to mobilize massive amounts of troop numbers, arm them, and organize them into a coherent fighting force. If they were able to establish a foothold and keep their army supplied Id give them a fighting change (so long as dragons arnt involved). They'd be at a severe technological disadvantage though.

Romans also were know to easily adapt to the situation and learn from the mistakes. Early they will loose badly against cavalry and superior weaponsmith, and wouldnt be able to besiege anything. But given time, resources and enough men to fill the loss they will quickly fill the gap and start steamrolling with their superior logistics and organization.
This also works from real life until at least late 14th century, when tech gab became too high and western kingdoms started develop better tacticts and logistics

This would make for a way more interesting last season if a dozen Roman legions appeared from ships.

How fast you want it?

Considering the retarded military strat used during the show. Not long.

Dragons and inferior weaponry would be an issue, but they can adapt to both.

Lol it was around 50-55 million but whatever

Dragons are shit, just ballista spam them.

have sex incel

Five minutes.

westeros isn't exactly a desert full of house archers

Subutai can do it in less than a year.

Attached: Subutai.jpg (720x1018, 151K)

Then why is there no Roman Empire anymore?
:^)

With your mom ?

Attached: 5FBC2C98-1C7D-4837-ADD0-291B9532C422.jpg (640x640, 79K)

>Are you fucking inbred? Do you have any idea the size of a Roman Legion compared to an Army in the war of the roses?
Battle of Cannae, one of the largest in antiquity:
50k Carthaginians, 86k Romans
Battle of Towton:
25-30k Yorkists, 30-35k Lancaster

>On the field, Romans would be vulnerable to heavy cavalry charges since they were mostly optimised to taking on infantry.

Those fuckers knew how to built fortifications in no-time though. They were known to create entire forts over night.

A mongol force under Subutai's command would absolutely REK everything. Werernt the Dothraki supposedly based on the mongols? Or were they Hun inspired?

Hard mode: you can't use Subutai, Suvorov or Alexander

Either, both, whatever.

I'll take napoleon over any of them.

Germans

I don't really know any significant force in history that wield the khopesh on horseback.

Your show is over you fuck, deal with it.

Cannae was fucking insane, almost all the Romans died in battle

Kublai would MOG Westeros too. Based Chinggis would rape the entire continent and leave behind 5000 bastard kids.

Rome would get destroyed. They didn’t even use steel weapons and would get fucked up by knights in plate armor.

Also ASOIAF had an equivalent to Rome, pretty sure it was Old Ghis or maybe even Valyria.

Napoleon would drill his soldiers so hard, they'd be able to march from Dorne to the Wall in an hour.
That is, if they were in the final couple of seasons.

You're living in it.

Napoleon and Hannibal are proven losers

Why did the Romans hate Scipio Africanus when he is one of their greatest commanders that won Carthage?

is there anything worse than mongolboos who think they're even remotely relevant outside of gigantic steppes and the immediately surrounding area?

Plate armor doesn't work in GOT unless it's combined with plot armor. Almost everyone and everything penetrates plate armor.

He was BLACK and the racist wyt Romans couldn't accept that an AFRICANus BULL was their better.

Politics
Popularity breeds hate

There's like two anons talking about that.
Get off your high (steppe) horse.

Mongols revolutionized warfare, with innovations in tactics, organization and intelligence.

His armies would have protection against dragons with Napoleon's fetish for artillery.

Scipio was actually Roman but I appreciate your efforts to shitpost

>be westerosi
>wear full plate
>gently brush against rosebush
>thorns pierce and shatter armor
>get infected booboo
>dies

One is bad enough
What innovations?

Yup. cannons>dragons

>What innovations?
Not conquering Southern China? You know. The rich part.

A Roman Legion with technology on par with Westeros would win easily. Hell, any historical army with similar technology would sweep Westeros they were that bad.

Not conquering southern China is a revolutionary military innovation?

Hate to break it to you user but field guns aren't really meant for dragons but for breaking up formations.

He'd walk through Essos too from the show at least since their light cavalry apparently has no issue suicide charging into defensive formations and only uses bows and arrows until they get in melee range.

Alcibiades
These fucks think they know backstabbing and double crossing
I will show them the good ol' Greek triple cross

They should have made the Dothraki a Mongol horde instead

Romans could deploy war elephants

Organization allowed for flexibility thus giving commanders freedom to exploit oppertunities without compromising the battleplan. Their armies were extremely mobile and had a supply system in use that allowed them to optimize their logistics and communication. Morever, Mongols employed military intelligence on a strategic level. Also, they employed psychological warfare. All in all, very based.

Why are you still replying to that user's bait?

>Implying Rome had the magic ballistas that were powerful enough to explode a ship
>Implying that anybody in Rome could snipe a dragon from a mile away like based Euron
>Implying that Drogo didn't dodge a ballista spam

Attached: 1557329198373.jpg (640x531, 77K)

>the virgin Littlefinger
>the chad Alcibiades

>no rest days

Lmao no wonder the romans got fucked. Over training their guys till they’re exhausted and too ill to fight

Was it bait? I mostly assume people dont really know anything about the mongols except for horse archers.

Qyburn's superballistas would destroy everything. Have you seen them going through and through ship hulls from a mile away?

Romans wouldn't know how to deal with full plate mail infantry and cavalry. They'd be shitting themselves.

Westeros would also have superior steel and armor.

>If somenthing is great, why doesnt it last forever :)

Yeah but Westerosi plate is a joke. A stapler could pierce it.

That's not canon though bro

It's only a joke when facing YASSSS because SLAY.

Season 1 plate worked just fine

>That's just like a cannon though bro

ftfy

Almost everything on that list applies to the style of warfare used by nomadic cavalry armies. How the fuck are things like psychological warfare a Mongol innovation? Do you seriously believe that no one had used terror as a weapon of war before the 13th century?

You're still using their alphabet :^)

This is correct. It’s about a thousand years difference in technology, if by Rome we’re talking about the empire before the loss of the capitol and the fall of the western regions. Plate, heavy cavalry with steel weapons, crossbows, longbows, trebuchets would annihilate ancient era legions.

why isnt there historical porn
why cant i see good porn of sexy roman women in togas or elizabethan cuties and that kind of thing

Mongols used it systematically and effectively.

Literally because of Jews and multiculturalism.

You laugh but I've been looking for good Classical Antiquity porn for ages.

A year tops. The armies of Westeros are a complete joke.

>55million soldiers shitting in all the rivers simultaniously
>westeros dies of diseases
>flawless victory

On a strategic level the Roman military machine is far superior to anything in Westeros. However, the big problem is winning a field battle against plate armoured infantry and heavy cavalry. A Principate field army would get completely shithoused against a late medieval force, it wouldn't even be close. A late Roman army might actually fare better because they made much more effective use of combined arms and had heavy cavalry themselves. The problem is they are still in much worse armour and don't have strong enough weapons to reliably penetrate plate.
In a defensive war they might drag it out enough to win but I can't see them being able to take any amount of ground because they'd get forced into a field battle and get rolled over by armoured knights

not larfin
i really want it

>the rich part
huh? the area of the yangtze and other central rivers is the only "rich" part

using something effectively =/= revolutionizing a field by inventing it

Their officer corps was pretty top notch as well.

acktually, implementing it on a strategic level counts as organizational innovation.

Could 10 million bears take over Westeros?

Attached: Grizzly-bear.jpg (460x701, 121K)

Spartacus

That's like saying HBO's Rome is porn.
It's not the same.

Seeing as Westeros armies have Total War ai on easy level of tactics I imagine not too long

Viva is pure sex

>Spartacus
>good

Which comes from the Greeks :^)

Eh whatever floats your boat

what bears are we talking?
sun bears?
polar bears?

Who is leading them?
The biggest bear?

why is there no Westeros?

user posted a picture of a brown bear though.

Subutai is a meme. He was a brilliant planner with a good understanding of logistics and foraging, but his battle records is far from ideal. For one Subutai has been defeated more than once. Many of the European victories attributed to him were led by Batu Khan, with Subutai as one of his commanders.

there's a lot of it but it's usually pre-2000

>Alcibiades
Alkiviathis

Attached: stannis.png (1173x753, 494K)

they species can vary in size vastly

Attached: 1410166241794.jpg (556x374, 51K)

Would the Roman Empire lose a late middle ages Western European kingdom? I don't think so.

Logistics wins wars though. Every single time. Doesnt matter if you lose every battle, as long as you can supply and outlast your enemy, you'll eventually win.

Mix of everything
Not the biggest, he used to reside in Finland, though

Torille

Attached: karhutaalasmaa.jpg (600x495, 132K)

Book Westeros with their book armies and book tactics or show Westeros with their show armies and show tactics?
I’ll assume show:
>every siege will be a suicide by the Westeros lords since everyone loves amassing outside their fortress and charging head on
>all cavalry instantly wasted as they charge straight into Roman lines of spears
>99% of people in Westeros use swords as their main weapon even though they have access to superior weapons like the poleaxe and billhook, throwing away most of their technological advantages
>barely any major leaders wear helemets in battle, easy kills
>all infantry charges are these disorganized brawls with well over 10 feet between each soldier in every direction
>line up artillery pieces at the very front lines

Apart from maybe the vale Westeros would just commit suicide by trying to stop the Roman BVLL machine, only if the vale actually uses the Bloody Gate and bottle necks the Romans to pick them off, then again the Romans could just try and amphibious assault. The North might stand a chance due to its vastness and having the Neck be a swampy, boggy hellhole, but again the Romans might just go around.

No they couldn't. The Romans primary advantage over a feudal society would be the sheer numbers advantage a classical army would have.
The Marian legion was bad at dealing with armor once it got widespread.

kαλησπέρα

Attached: 1371399860192.png (503x639, 631K)

Would Song China win against Westeros?

checked. Westeros stands no chance

Rashidun Army

>every siege will be a suicide by the Westeros lords since everyone loves amassing outside their fortress and charging head on

A well-timed and coordinated sortie can practically end a siege in a matter of hours.

Gunpowder disagrees
What point is of inventing something if it isn't used to it's full potential

You seem to forget or ignore the fact that the Romans were so good at conquest because of superior equipment. When they faced people with similar technology things didn't go as smoothly

esl trash fuck off

>The Huns and Germanic invasions are because le boogeyman

I saw a porn like that once, some milf actress dress in a toga getting gangbanged by some black guys. Can't remember much else about it

romans also built. they were carpenters and construction workers as much as they were soldiers. they built roads and fortresses everwhere they went, and would never have more than probably 10-20 miles to fall back to a fortified position, which they could do on a road they built on the way to aid the supply line.

romans also employed mass trenches full of spikes and walled defensive positions which would eliminate a lot of cavalry benefits.

thats how Caesar defeated vercingatorix if i remember right, he walled him in within a wall outside a wall built around a fort or a city or some shit

all that said, westeros does have some supernatural shit, and that would probably be the big thing that would, if it could, save it. especially the dragons or the whitewalkers.

>Thousands of Eurasians running from the eternal Mongol
>"DUDE, JOOS"

Elizabethan? No, but togas? Sure there's toga porn, and it's in the mainstream (e.g. Brazzers)
But yeah if you want a porn epic of Aeneas pounding Dido and Dido revenge burning herself on a pyre (of black dicks), no. In general, porn with any real plot is mostly gone now, all you get is gonzo or near-gonzo.

They liked him, but as time went by they started turning on him due to politics. He became old and increasingly irrelevant, and when he was accused of corruption by his opponents he decided to leave the city and died shortly after. His achievements nonetheless were uncontested, he was the first to defeat Hannibal, dominate Carthage and gave Roma its first step into become the empire we all know.

>Then why is there no Roman Empire anymore?
Wanna make another guess user?

Attached: fasces_us_congress.jpg (480x360, 22K)

Like one day since we know fast travel is possible

yikes

not an empire. Only Marxists use empire this elastically.

One night and 20 good men.

>You seem to forget or ignore the fact that the Romans were so good at conquest because of superior equipment
not necessarily, Gallic metallurgy for example was much better than Roman. The main thing they had in the republican era was an enormous reserve of manpower and post-Marius a professional force with a massive logistical tail. The individual Roman soldier's fighting equipment was good, but in itself wasn't a game changer

>not an empire.
yes they are, they are currently militarily occupying Germany after 75 years since formal surrender

Even the late romans would win easily.

Attached: A4679E07-11F9-4872-BB91-9B1BCF595BE2.jpg (736x594, 232K)

nord*cks

Which period? By the time of the Marcomannic Wars the Germanic tribes had equipment to rival Rome

Book Westeros? They would get BTFO by medieval knights. It's like wanting a Civil War era army to fight against an army that has tanks.

Show Westeros? About as long as it takes to march through it.

GRRM specifically makes clear that only the nobles get plate armor. Same thing with middle age armies. Plate does not become universal until the early renaissance, and even then those are miles are very small, not the 400,000 men that Rome could field, mostly in their own form of segmented plate.

How many gopniks would it take to conquer Westeros?

Roman equipment was literally average.

they would get immediately BTFO by a knight charge or longbows. this is like putting a napoleonic army against a ww2 army, the tech difference is too great

this but unironically

Not everyone wears plate though. Knights, noblemen and the like had plate but the rest were lucky if they could find a scraps of chain mail or hardened leather. Meanwhile the romans had uniform base armor and weapons. I think the romans could cause enough damage to the body of the medieval armies ie the peasantry, to force the knights into retreat. After that it's all about mopping up the remains.

Diversity.

Late Rome was better than Republican Rome at war, though.

It's not half as close to this difference. Better metal for weapons and armor is not nearly as close as the difference machine guns, tanks, planes and heavy artillery makes.

Rome is a great tale of what happens to a country when it goes with the multiculturalism route. Shame people are so fucking stupid that they never learn.

>Why did the WESTERN Roman Empire collapse?
Too much in fighting in the army to vault their commander to Emperor. War costs money, and once Rome was no longer conquering lands, moving to a defensive position, it became too costly causing massive inflation.
>Also nordcucks.

its the war of the roses why no cannons?

Khalid ibn al-Walid is so much more important to the spread of Islam than Mohammed it's fucking ridiculous.

KURWA

What is the Bear King's honeytax policy?

Great, another historylet /pol/tard. Corruption and administrative incompetence killed Rome. They german troops fought admirably and often to the death in defence of Rome.

How long would it take for a single samurai to conquer Westeros?

Attached: 1526310481212.jpg (930x916, 71K)

>Same thing with middle age armies. Plate does not become universal until the early renaissance
So late med, which Westeros is pretty clearly based on
>not the 400,000 men that Rome could field
Rome could not field 400,000 men. The entire army was that size but in no way could they field that many men at once. Rome's peak manpower mobilisation was when they still had a citizen conscript based army, they managed to raise over half a million but again the vast majority were not deployable

By all rights the crisis of the 3rd century should have killed them graveyard dead.

How many times has the steel of his katana been folded?

With the "tactics" we have seen so in the show? I give them 6 months and they will have totally annihilated every army there is in Westeros while taking next to no losses.
In fact, any even half decently equipped army with technology from that time period could do it, provided their commander wasn't a braindead retard

>Romans would be vulnerable to heavy cavalry charges

Not really though, given how they whopped the Parthians and their Cataphracts. And since Westeros is roughly high middle ages, their knights aren't really significantly better armored than Cataphracts.

This post is a great tale of what happens when you listen to propaganda

>They german troops fought admirably and often to the death in defence of Rome.
They fought for money, not for Rome. The minute an emperor or a commander wasn't suited for the, they disposed him. See Majorian, the sack of Rome by the G*rmanic scum, etc. They held no loyalty to Rome, nor to the idea of it, nor did they try to integrate into Roman society. That's why they backstabbed and switched sides so much.

Corruption and administrative incompetence also had a part of it, of course, but the immigration and the multiculturalism attempt enacted by Caracalla is what was ultimately caused Rome's collapse. Everything else, and the things you pointed, were as a result of that immigration

>When they faced people with similar technology things didn't go as smoothly

Carthage was far more advanced than rome.

they finished salty, pun intended

No you fucking twit, the absolute madness that was everything between the death of Septimius Severus and Aurelian was what killed Rome.

>but the rest were lucky if they could find a scraps of chain mail or hardened leather
not by the late medieval period, munitions plate and even some higher quality armours were not too expensive for most men at arms to afford.
>peasantry
again, late med armies were not really peasantry except in extremis. Most men under arms in the 15th century were at least semi-professional and at least lower middle class.
>to force the knights into retreat
How? While they're engaged with the infantry line they'd get fucked by a cavalry charge. Bear in mind medieval warhorses were far heavier than anything the Romans had, and stirrups+lance couching meant charges were far more effective than anything the Romans would have faced before.

Was a medieval charge really more powerful than Parthian cataphract charge?

THE ELEPHANT IS PREGNANT SCIPIO

Attached: 1529512332693.jpg (220x306, 19K)

>They fought for money, not for Rome. The minute an emperor or a commander wasn't suited for the, they disposed him
What, exactly like the Roman soldiers had been doing for the previous three hundred years?
The Romans had always used 'barbarian' or foreign auxiliaries and attempted to integrate foreign cultures into their own. The extent of Romanisation in the provinces is a subject of enormous debate and most evidence seems to imply that Rome's empire was much less of an imposed monoculture than it's made out to be.

Horses are for riding, not fucking.
That is what butter is for.

Attached: 1550989018366.png (227x227, 80K)

>roman tries to hit a westerosi
>can't penetrate armor
>roman tries to hide behind their shield
>westerosi pikes poke through it

but forget all that, westeros already has the crossbow, that alone can win the whole war. roman bowman has to be trained for years to be effective. meanwhile you can hand a crossbow to a child and expect them to kill something.

in the social realm its the same story, feudalism is much more productive way to organize society than the roman empire. it developed out of the empires failures. their yields from the land and peoples labor is greater, just all around more efficient. there's no way the romans win cause of some "attrition" bullshit

yes. Bigger horses, bigger lances with stirrups, which is an enormous difference. Couching the lance made a massive difference as well, cavalry in antiquity usually charged with a spear held overhand. Couching the lance transfers the momentum of the horse through the lance into the target, i.e the body of men. A late medieval charge with armoured horse was incredibly devastating.

And what caused the Crisis of the Third Century, you absolute moron? The Crisis of the Third Century also wasn't the death of the Empire, as Aurelian restored it to its original borders. The numerous backstabbing of German mercenaries agianst Roman Emperors and the power they wielded is pretty much what ended the Roman Empire. Majorian was the last emperor who could have restored the Western half and by who he was killed? By German mercenaries.

>What, exactly like the Roman soldiers had been doing for the previous three hundred years?
Nope.
>The Romans had always used 'barbarian' or foreign auxiliaries and attempted to integrate foreign cultures into their own. The extent of Romanisation in the provinces is a subject of enormous debate and most evidence seems to imply that Rome's empire was much less of an imposed monoculture than it's made out to be.
The auxiliaries were just non-citizens. At any rate, they didn't have a very large role and the leginos themselves were filled with citizens, predominantly from the Italian penninsula. The foreigners never really held any power until late Rome here pretty much the entire Roman army was comprised of German mercenaries and other foreigners.

If applied properly. We're going by both show and books and none of those chucklefucks has shit on Sobieski.

You're a fucking tard.

Was this really necessary? You could have just admitted I was correct and you have no arguments.

>On the field, Romans would be vulnerable to heavy cavalry charges since they were mostly optimised to taking on infantry.
Nah, the Triarii, the men with the spears, are the most experienced soldiers in the entire legion

Attached: Roman Triarii.jpg (466x347, 48K)

Even by the time of Augustus, the auxilia were playing a substantial role in the Roman army and their importance only increased with time.

Maybe if you count cultural advances as "technology"; Rome's main strength was its institutions. The way it organized its society allowed it to generate enormous amounts of skilled soldiers and engineers relative to their population, while keeping all of them well-fed and equipped, an ability that plainly none of the factions in GoT have. If Rome ruled Westeros, they could've taken the losses of every single army over the entire conflict combined five times over and still had more soldiers to spare than they'd know what to do with.

Then what happens depends on the period. If it's the republic then the soldiers just all go home and whine a lot about how their farms got bought up by the elites in their absence. If it's the late republic, a bunch of veterans go warring in essos to sack themselves some cities 'cuz that farming shit sure ain't worth it. If it's the empire, then all the various armies start declaring their own general king and begin killing each other. Probably, Dothraki or something sail over and begin sacking their shit instead while rome's armies just sort of stand around watching it happen because they don't want to upset the internal power balance by risking their own men.
Good thing the westerosi don't have that problem. Hereditary rule by kings at least mostly solves that shit.
>>institute elective monarchy
oh wait, nevermind

Uh no, they were so good at conquest because they had an incredibly well organized military and were extremely good at adapting to new situations. That and they just didn't give a shit. Lost their entire (as in, literally all of it) standing army against Carthage and just kept going anyway.

>Nope
What's the difference? I'd be interested to hear how what happened to Majorian is any different to Emperors killed by Roman soldiers
In any case, you're vastly overestimating the military side of the reason for the end of Western Rome. The collapse was far from due to Germans in the army.

Putting your entire army in front of your castle is not a "coordinated sortie".

gunpowder does not exist

corruption and incompetence have nothing to do with multiculturaism :)
kys

>plate armoured infantry

Literally not a thing during middle ages.

sad

While I'm not entirely sure about GoT, weren't medieval warfare incredibly tiny compared to ancient/classical warfare?

Like a 10k vs 100k difference tiny.

Depends. 'Medieval' covers an enormous timespan. But generally, yeah early medieval armies were tiny.

Except technologically speaking, they're 12th to maybe 13th century at best.

Wasn't late-late medieval armies also pretty small?

Nope, they didn't play a "substantial" role. They patrolled the borders and squashed revolts, that's pretty much it. The auxilia and the power they gradually received is one of the big causes of the separation of Rome during the CotTC. Again, no matter how you try to spin this - it always leads to immigration as the main cause for what Rome endured in its final days and where the malignant cancer that consumed Rome formed from.

>What's the difference
The difference is that when an emperor was an assassinated, they were usually valid reasons for doing so. Majorian was assassinated because a Germanic mercenary tried to go way beyond his station.
>The Romans had always used 'barbarian' or foreign auxiliaries and attempted to integrate foreign cultures into their own. The extent of Romanisation in the provinces is a subject of enormous debate and most evidence seems to imply that Rome's empire was much less of an imposed monoculture than it's made out to be.
Ok. Please explain to me the reasons for the fall of Western Rome that aren't tied to immigration. Even the Gothic and Vandal wars waged against Rome were with the idea to settle on Roman territory. Whether inside or outside, Rome collapsed because of multiculturalism and immigration.

millions, any other amount wouldn't even notice that they aren't in eastern europe anymore.

Nah, a single maniple of the romans in tetsudo formation would easily drive them back.

Those were pretty large, especially as you approach the 15th century.

Ah. Fair enough.

People seem to neglect the fact that by the late middle ages, levies were almost entirely gone and were replaced by permanent domestic armies that were fairly standardized. Not to mention the wide number of mercenaries that were employed. Even the common infantryman now had at least a sword and a suit of armor. Rulers fielded larger armies and employed more advanced tactics. Plate armor also improved considerably during this period, where it made knights basically impenetrable to blows. Late middle ages military technology was also on another level when compared to classical antiquity Romans. They had trebuchets, stirrups, steel weapons/armor, and the longbow.
>TLDR Romans would get massacred.

Bruh a charging bear army would smash their lines

plate armor is for protection against medieval era weapons, chainmail is good enough to protect you from what the romans had
youtu.be/D3sjF023IJI?t=370

Knights were trained since childhood to become killing machines and had vastly superior weapons/armor.

Actually no. The romans was very disciplined and would never let their lines be broken. Also their tetsudos (an unbeatable formation of overlaping shields that has never been surpased) combined with their segmented plate armor would make them literally unable to be injured by the bearclaws.
Thus it would just be an issue of time and enough pilae to devastate the bearcharges, and the romans had all the discipline, training and logistics to carry that out.

Attached: battle.jpg (736x533, 126K)

Well I mean dragons man.
Assuming pre dragons.
Not long.
The valyrians were magical romans essentially but they are long gone.

Testudo was only used against archers. A youtuber said this once so it's true.

But knights fight with honour, the romans had no such childish illusions.
Thus they would win just like when Bronn easily took out the best knight of the Vale.

also
>gunpowder

>Bruh a charging bear army would smash their lines
Do you know how a bear spear is used user?

Attached: 67_.jpg (890x890, 327K)

it was used against ranged projectiles, not just archers

Westerosi armies did NOT all have full plate armour.
Again like medieval armies, only the knights had full plate. Nobility. Very expensive.
Most just had thick clothing and chainmail plus pikes, or shields etc.

Testudo was primarily for protection against missiles, a simple shield wall with their javelins would be more effective against bears.

not necessarily true. When confronted with an enemy who's technology outstripped their own, they werent afraid to adapt and change, often adopting their rivals technology and building upon it. During the cartheginian wars they went from having no viable fleet, to finding a cartheginian warship, reverse engineering it, teaching their soldiers how to row, and adding a bridge system to utilize their superior infanty during sea battles.

The Romans were great because their leaders and soldiers fought for glory and for Rome and for triumphs and for the Gods.

I fought because i thought it was cool. It wasn't and all i got was a suburu wrx and knee problems.

Westeros is set in a fantasy version of the mid-late middle ages, with better armor, equipment and weaponry. Roman legionnaires weren't even fully armored. The longbow was like a long range sniper rifle and would be a legion killer. Rome always had a hard time fighting equally trained and equipped enemies.

There's also like 1 knight to every 1000 Romans.
Just because there were knights doesn't mean the vast majority of army is made up of fairly badly equipped experienced peasants.

I don't think you comprehend the power of an organized army of bears, imagine the sheer weight of dozens of bears crashing onto your shield wall

Actually entirely wrong.
If you watch the movie The Eagle you can see a roman platoon using the tetsudo to charge an army of undisciplined barbarians, easily destroying them.

All that weight is used to impale itself on a spear thats backed against the ground

Attached: 1291180332293_doggo_literally_shaking_animooted.gif (125x125, 29K)

North China is historically the rich part dummy. Also where all the Capital cities were

That number of bear would try to surround them, meaning the 360 degree protection of a tetsudo would be needed.
The romans trained daily in battle tactics, they would not let their lines be broken by any enemy, they were far to disciplined.

nigger what
most knights were just shitty (minor) nobles who trained a couple of years in their youth and then sat on their estate all day managing day to day work or sitting around their lord's estate doing much of the same
fight autists like Barristan or Dayne were by far the exception rather than the rule for medieval knights
the only advantage they have over legions is better weapons and armor, and that is hardly an advantage if you know even a little bit about roman military history

>A mongol force under Subutai's command would absolutely REK everything. Werernt the Dothraki supposedly based on the mongols? Or were they Hun inspired?

Both Huns and Mongols were far more than savages like Dothraki. They had engineers, knew how to build siege machines, organize transport and logistics and had extensive spy network before invading any region(they used merchants as their scouts)

bears are fucking pussies dood
Unless you mean polar bears, even then.

Ditka vs. the entire Roman army who wins?

Bears would not fight in an organized manner. Romans would destroy them.
A disorderly mob is no more an army than a heap of building materials is a house.

Um try again sweetie
"As central governments grew in power, a return to the citizen and mercenary armies of the classical period also began, as central levies of the peasantry began to be the central recruiting tool. It was estimated that the best infantrymen came from the younger sons of free land-owning yeomen, such as the English archers and Swiss pikemen. England was one of the most centralized states in the Late Middle Ages, and the armies that fought the Hundred Years' War were mostly paid professionals."
"As the Middle Ages progressed in Italy, Italian cities began to rely mostly on mercenaries to do their fighting rather than the militias that had dominated the early and high medieval period in this region. These would be groups of career soldiers who would be paid a set rate. Mercenaries tended to be effective soldiers, especially in combination with standing forces, but in Italy they came to dominate the armies of the city states."

I think you underestimate the warrior spirit in many autistic nobles user, groomed to try and be like jaime lannister, but yes many nobles just sat and did nothing collecting taxes from the peasants.

Depends on the era and quality of the legions. If it's Caesar's to Trajan's times, I think about a year or two. The continent is quite large and there's only one highway, but every character in it is a complete fucking idiot and the technology level is pretty inconsistent. If it's Punic Wars time, probably not. If it's late roman to justianian times, it'll depend on how much gold they have to pay the westerosi to fight among themselves or defect and if they have any gold left to sweep in in the aftermath.

Attached: 1549125780587.jpg (529x705, 67K)

don't know why this sort of story isn't more commonly done
only really Turtledove and Eric Flint and a handful of other authors have done it though the rest usually do it on a smaller scale
it's pretty entertaining

Attached: 51freE3E-3L.jpg (301x500, 40K)

In the event of being captured how many stinky Roman cocks could Arya Stark before breaking?

Jews, G*rmans and Jesus

Could this man alone conquer Westeros?

you're conflating modern imperialism with roman imperialism and even then the foundation of your argument is rocky
>muh technology
doesn't explain how Rome was able to defeat the Latins, the Sarmatians, the Greeks, the Iceni, the Carthaginians, the Arverni, the Cantabrians, the Suebi, the Diadochus Kingdoms, etc. (all of which had equal if not superior technology, tactics, manpower, etc.)
eat shit and die retard

The romans were quite possibly the most adaptable civilization we have in recorded history. They just kept rolling with punches and adapting to their enemy's technology when it comes to military matters. They survived what was basically the apocalypse for them. There's nothing stopping them from getting studying their enemy's armors and tactics and replicating them (and even improving them, like they did in real life).

Attached: 81lcAKS8dVL._RI_.jpg (1600x1200, 362K)

Betrayal from within. Romans never suffared defeats in the fields and could have conquered the entire world had they not been stabbed in the back by their own politicians.

An autistic virgin cripple conquered GoT's westeros, so I dont' see why not.

Mongols, yes.
Huns, not so much. Even under Attila they were barely more than a savage horde of horsefuckers, who let their subjugated tribes do most of the legwork. Attila was pretty much the only one among them who had any true ambition for his people to more than savages.

Knights could be superb warriors, but they were generally shitty soldiers. They tended to be one trick ponies. Now, professional mounted man at arms however. Those were the real deal as they actually trained to fight as a unit and were equipped just as well as knights.

*blocks your path*

Attached: parthian_army.jpg (660x500, 62K)

Realistically even the Kingdom of Benin could have taken on Westeros

Fuck me you don't even need romans. Hannibal fought the Romans at the start of their rise and he'd conquer Westeros.

Actually, Sargon of Akkad or perhaps even Hammurabi of Babylon might have been able to conquer them. They show no strategic thinking or any discipline.

That was a fluke so it dosen't count as a defeat, also the romans didn't want to conquer them in the first place.

Yeah, that's real life, while in GoT there are plenty of peasant armies.

If the king sends for the Golden Company then sure, they might be in trouble, but not from their small number of knights.

>115289310
There is a Roman Empire. the "fall" is some christian propaganda. Qeysar Erdoğan currently leads the empire

Knights were trained in combat, but they were not as good as real soldiers. If you read the battle accounts of knights in real life, especially french knights, it would read more like a comedy sketch than real battles. They were essentially real life Leeroy Jenkins, and they rushed in without thought or fear because it was courageous and chivalric to them.

seeTen million bers. Ten fucking million. That's like every bear on earth unified. Probably over a billion pounds of bear. The Bear Army would steamroll all of earth.

Based Julius Caesar would conquer the whole thing in a month or so.

The Romans didn't have steel weapons the would be crushed by knights in plate armor.

Imagine having one of histories greatest generals, what do you do?

>Forced to resign.

Why are rulers such fucking retards?

As everything bad that happens in Europe: germans.

Attached: 1546715613128.png (1232x2974, 203K)

Yeah sure bot how long would it take for an army of sword-wielding chimps to conquer it?

Again, romans in a testsudo would be unvulnerable to their attacks and their discipline would mean that their formation could not be broken. Then it would just be a simple matter of using their pilae (a javelin that would bend so the bears could not throw it back) and gladiuses (a short sword, that means their can fight at close range where the bear would be defenseless due to not having a shield of his own) to grind down the bear "army"

>Ten fucking million.
Unrealistic

Politics. Authoritarian rulers dont really like popular generals. They are a threat to them.

Not much, since the people in Westeros would be too busy stabbing each other in the back, as shown in GoT.

>illegally invading
absolute Chad barbarians dabbing on Roman christcucks

Attached: Screen_Shot_2019_05_17_at_11.48.34_AM.0.png (2836x1532, 3.88M)

>Romans never suffared defeats

Attached: 220px-Mommsen_p265.jpg (220x345, 26K)

In the end the Romans won more often than the Parthians. Even the more aggressive sassanids got so fucked by Rome that they completely imploded and got conquered by the arabs.

Don't forget that Karl Marx was also german.
G*rmanoids are a cancer to humanity, at the level of jews.

Depends on the number of good men.

wrong
Romans actually adopted most of their equipment from the people they were fighting against. Lorica Hamata (chainmail) was invented by celts, their helmet was of gallic origin ect.
The key advantage of the romans was the fact that they were had a fully mobilised and well trained standing army at all times. This advantage would hold true against westerosi peasant conscripts as well.

>Depends what era
They seem to be wearing lorica segmentata, so we're looking at somewhere from Augustus to the Five Good Emperors. Basically peak Rome. I think they curbstomp Westeros.

Attached: 50015902_1144179019089960_5320520438447817987_n.jpg (480x480, 39K)

a weeks at much

They were never defeated by the carthaginians, in all the battles the romans didn't win there were other factors at play. Hannibal was just lucky.
When the romans decided to not play around and take it seriously they easily btfo'd him and defeated the carthages so bad they don't exist anymore.

Attached: roman-legionaries.jpg (900x600, 164K)

>Spent 3 years studying Roman history
>Never seen game of thrones
Fuck.

Anyway i guess about 7 years with one angry Caesar

>Romans land in dorne or somewhere with a natural port
>Immediately begin scouting ahead, capturing any commoner who knows the land and begin employing translators
>Start bribing nobles to join their cause with gold and promises
>Start bribing the oppressed peasantry as well
>Steal their armors and weapons and copy them
>Whoever is left on the crown's side can muster about 100k levies in total
>Rome musters like 400k professional soldiers, including auxiliaries and barbarians they bribed
>Westerosi are led by nobles, romans are led by career officers with a clear line of succession. If a noble dies, his army falls apart. If a roman general dies, he's replaced instantly.
>Romans BTFO westerosi army with superior tactics and besiege the resistance
>There's like 4 major ports in the entire continent so they stop any kind of outside supply
>They conquer the best and most fertile lands to turn into power bases, and make everyone else client kings that they assimilate anyway
>They turn westeros into a superpower in 100 years

Attached: 1547215856164.jpg (262x489, 47K)

I agree but the premise set forth was an army of ten million bears. All of Rome would be covered in bear poop.
They put out 40000 legionnaires against Hannibal and it was a huge crazy amount. Compare that to ten million fucking bears. The sheer force of that mob of bears would break the line. Fighting grizzlies using short swords? It's not gonna work. A bear doesn't need armor, it's protection is being a huge as fuck beast. If they fielded every fit man in Italy at the time they could have a 1:1 matchup against the bears. But I'm still gonna give it to ten million bears.
>planting spears in the ground
snapped under the weight of the bears
>shield wall
buried under bears
>going CQC with a gladius against a bear
congrats a bear just fucking ate you

Triarii were disbanded in 107 bc when Marius reformed the legions.

are you retarded? he made Rome his bitch. they didn't dare to attack him on their own soil for 15 fucking years.
When the romans decided to not play around and take it seriously they got assraped at cannae.

et tu, brute?

>I need twenty(thousand) good polar bears

Attached: serveimage.jpg (1321x1401, 469K)

Ah, the eternal Anglo spreading its lies yet again.

>Romans never suffared defeats in the fields
What? Even at the absolute height of Roman power, they suffered disastrous defeats. Carrhae, Teutoberg Forest...

Attached: cicero.gif (245x245, 511K)

>The sheer force of that mob of bears would break the line.
Why? The romans would just disrupt their charge with pilae and stay in formation where their training and discipline would easily win the day.
>but muh 10 million
Okay, maybe they would have to dig a ditch or set up a pallisade or two. The romans did that before breakfast every day.
Seriously, you should read some history rather than just watching the animal channel

>When the romans decided to not play around and take it seriously they
...sent a massive army right at Hannibal and the result was him absolutely annihilating said army at Cannae. The Romans only started winning when they began actively avoiding a direct confrontation with Hannibal.

Peak Romans would just drain the swamp and genocide the bogniggers. I mean, those assholes built a mountain next to another mountain just to kill some jewish rebels.

Does Westeros get Dany and her dragons?

You mean they didn't bother to go chasing him for those 15 years as he would run away all the time.
>cannae
Does not count. The roman army only "lost" because their leaders being too much involved in politicking against each other. Had they fought for real they would have destroyed him

>They were never defeated by the carthaginians, in all the battles the romans didn't win there were other factors at play. Hannibal was just lucky.
delusional cope

the romans are the stanley kubrik of civilizations. massively overrated by plebs who probably have not even a minimum of knowledge about the east

even if they get Dany the unsullied would probably get fucked. They seem to resemble the macedonian phalanx most closely, which the romans btfo.
The only concern would be the dragons, and how powerful they are depends on whether they are nerfed (ep 3-5 dragons) or buffed (ep 6 dragon) by DnD at the time.

>le carrhae
That was because of Crassus being retarded, not because of the enemy
>teutoburg
Same, retarded leader that does not represent rome. In a real battle the romans never suffered defeat from barbarians

How come humans never tamed bears for battle?

all your posts were written with latin alphabet.
cope harder baby eaters

>cannae doesn't count
Even ignoring how stupid this is, what about Trasimene? Or the Trebia?

Westerosi are so dumb that even at their worst, most retardedly self-sabotagingly racist and most in debt, the romans would destroy them, with a numerically inferior army as well.

Attached: 1557876132195.jpg (1064x1181, 452K)

practically every military after the fall of the western roman empire and the proliferation of gunpowder was inferior to rome

Already adressed this, try to keep up.

Attached: centurion_bild_3.jpg (900x598, 136K)

>Yea Forumsedditor education

Lmao at the amount of delusion in this thread. Dragons would fucking destroy everything anyway.

Westeros was afraid of the Dothraki, they'd be destroyed by Rome.

>In a real battle
What the hell is your definition of a real battle? Because Romans lost battles to barbarians all the time. Even Caesar lost one when he was conquering Gaul.

It depends. What's their tax policy?

>defeat doesn't count because reasons
then I guess Zama doesn't count either because Hannibal was forced by politicians to fight a battle he didn't want to fight with an inexperienced army.

Dragons were but a brief flash in the pan in westeros in the most recent epoch

t. Cato

Yeah gendarmes were basically knights 2.0 with all the flaws patched out.

>Trasimene
That was the lake, not the carthaginians
>Trebia
Roman troops let down by their commanders playing at competetive politics. Had they fought properly they would easily have destroyed hannibal with a combination of pilae and fortifications

>Without dragons
Rome takes everything between the Neck and Dorne in a few years. Even faster if they can get at least a few major local lords to flip and fight for their side.
>With dragons
The Romans last about a week. All the tactics in the world can't save you from what's essentially a couple of giant helicopters armed with super-sized flamethrowers when you're stuck using 1st century AD technology.

1 emperor anus for each Praetor

>i thought it was cool. It wasn't
t. never seen combat

>they only lost because they were incompetent so it doesn't count
Delusional

Yeah no. The only time the romans failed it was due to their own leaders weakness or random factors, not the enemy being strong. And ceasar btfo'd the gauls, enslaving one million and killing another with just a few legions

jesus, is this guy for real? embarrassing.

>when Hannibal was totally destroyed Scipio it somehow dosen't count as a defeat
Carthage was salted and destroyed. This is a fact.

turks adopted roman organization, logistics, tactics and steam rolled european kingdoms with ottoman empire.

And Romans were defeated in battle dozens of times. Also a fact.

And Westeros can’t even support 100,000. 99% of its soldiers are not even professional. Mid to late medieval we are looking at maximum 5,000 man armies in mercenary skirmishes.

>I-it doesn't count unless the battle is no items, fox only, final destination

Turks are Latins larping as Arabs.

Attached: 1549668120490.png (694x960, 713K)

>giving up on providing arguments
Dude, just accept that rome would destroy your 10 bajillion bears or fantasy snowflake england just as easily as they annihilated everyone else they fought.
Then name one.

hail erdogan brother

There were already several ones named. You going "reeeeeee doesn't count" is not an argument.

>turks adopted roman organization, logistics, tactics and steam rolled european kingdoms with ottoman empire.

They had cannons, artillery, and muskets. Their organization, logistics, and battle tactics were nothing like the Romans lel.

I can’t tell if this is bait. Economic levels under feudalism took 1100 years to return to Roman levels, and by that time it was transforming into something else.

Also Late Romans had crossbows. Go to your local library for an hour before posting here ever again.

Cope westcel

You're a fucking retard.

>dies to white walkers because no dragon glass
>dies to dragons
I'm sure when we find out what the Lord of Light is that'll destroy them too.

>GoT
>full plate
you mean leather jackets

None of them were roman defeats, just cases of retarded consuls stabbing each other in the back due to corruption and politics. And in the end they easily destroyed carthage and drove the germans back to their worthless forests.

Tell That to Arminius Cavalry Commander
In Teutoburg

>Huns, not so much.
They knew how to make armor

barbaric insults, just like your ancestors

How the fuck were they stabbing each other in the back during battle? And even if they were that doesn't make it not a Roman defeat, you brainlet.
Btw Romans don't exist anymore.

>better equipped

And not even a quarter of the men seen under the Empire. Also I don’t see how longbows will do anything against testudo.

That was an ambush, not a battle.

longbows could penetrate plate retard, your gay huddle won't do shit

4 U
unrv.com/economy/roman-taxes.php

both of them wanted the glory
they alternated days of command so they often attempted to win the battle in 1 day so the other consul would look bad

>>dies to dragons

Attached: LA LEGIÓN ROMANA TOMA UNA CIUDAD (DISPAROS Y ARTILLERÍA). BLOG IMPERIO ROMANO DE XAVIER VALDERAS ( (960x708, 154K)

Romans have never won a single battle. It was just cases of retarded enemy politicians backstabbing each other.

Again, rome was only brought down due to their own carruption and traitors backstabbing each other, not because they were ever defeated by any of the dumb barbarians that annoyed them at most.

Pick up a book sometime, then you might come to understand why your tv-show would be no match against the roman war machine

>And in the end they easily destroyed carthage

>3 wars to destroy carthage
>easily destroyed

Attached: 129118033223453.jpg (480x360, 11K)

>it doesn't count as a defeat if your military leaders are retarded and doesn't know how to battle properly

>Carthage doesn't exist anymore
>Rome stands
?

How does them being stupid invalidate the defeat? And if it's actually as you say it even highlights them as defeats of the Roman system entirely as opposed to just defeats of individual generals.

>Then name one.
Trasimene
Cannae
Noreia
Burdigala
Arausio
Carrhae
Teutoberg Forest
Adrianapole

a longbow arrow could split through even thick metal plate armor from a distance, testudo formation isn't meme magic, it isn't invincible. And the entire Roman population wasn't specially trained, really only the advanced or frontier legions would be the ones to worry about.

Actually, the tetsudo would have overlapping shields combined with roman segmented plate, meaning the longbows would accomplish nothing.
And that situation would never happen as roman artillery would easily outshoot the archers, even their pilae would be sufficent to drive them back

Getting btfo is getting btfo aka a defeat. The reasons don't fucking matter. I'd tell you to cope harder but it's literally impossible to surpass your level of cope.

>ancient artillery is better than advanced artilery of the late Middle Ages
Are you downright stupid?

I've already adressed most of those. But clearly your too ideologically entrenched to listen to reason, seems like you got some growing up to do.

That's pretty shit compared to the ones in GoT, and even they weren't enough to kill Drogon.