Comparison between Roman and Han Empires on Wikipedia!

[flyingchicken]

1. "Mongols didn't devastate the Ottoman Empire"- What is TIMUR then, my friend.

A matter of how much you want to generalize. If you're willing to call all the Germanic tribes "Germans" I guess you can call Timur a Mongol. So, on some generalizations, yes the Mongols did devastate the Ottoman Empire.

2. "Crossbow & catapault work on same principles" Please check your history, as well as your physics.

They do, i.e. tension (for catapults, it's the stick or string thing pulled back before letting go to give that umph; for crossbows it's the string thing pulled back before letting go to give that umph)

3. "Germans have excellent cavalry"- Excellence indeed my friend. Try keeping 200,000 horses alive in forest sometime.

Not all Germans, as you called them, lived in forests. Also, there were accounts of Germans on horseback fighting the Romans. I guess you could say that the Roman historians who a few older modern historians cite were probably lying, but to be fair we should also be able to say that for the Chinese historians who a few older modern historians cite were also probably lying.

4. "Rivers are terrible defensive barriers"- Right. That's why every empire relies on them for defence at one point, and all campaigns stop when they reach them.

Rivers are good defensive barriers because they disrupt supply lines. Barbarian hordes of Mongols or Germans or whatnot do not rely on supply lines. So yes, rivers are good defensive barriers, but against them fugly barbs who forage and stuff, not much.

5. "Torsion crossbows"- OH MAN, this one got me . You guys aren't too great at history, but you sure are good at oxymorons!

An oxymoron is "conjoining contradictory terms (as in 'deafening silence')."

"Torsion" in Physics is the force that returns a twisted thing back to its original position. Like, if you twist rubber band a lot it'll just go back to its not-twisty state--that's torsion.

In this picture, we can see the knob things, which twisted as the chopstick-looking things turned. The string can be pulled back without stretching it when you turn towards the user. Torsion would return the twisty knob things back to normal, which would straighten the string. If there was an arrow there, it would have been pushed by the string.

If you would consider the thing pictured above to be a crossbow (it looks like one), then there is no oxymoron. But if you think all crossbows should be tension-powered, and the thing above is a faux-crossbow or pseudo-crossbow but not really a crossbow, then yes, there is an oxymoron.

6. "Jesus, you're just making yourself look stupider and stupider." Man, the ad hominem piles on and on. Jesus isn't gonna to save you, and he sure didn't save the christians after the Germans overran the Roman Empire.

Well, the Germans, after a few generations converted to Christianity, so Jesus gets the last laugh.

7. "What did the Romans do, build them on the spot and leave them when they were done? I might be willing to accept that Han crossbows had greater range, but that hardly means the Romans didn't have them. The Greeks had for Christ's sake, they pre-date Rome."

Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_between_Roman_and_Han_Empires Which I wrote, by the way) and look at the ballista please. DO YOU THINK THAT THING IS PORTABLE AND YOU CAN SWING IT AROUND. THE ANSWER IS NO.

Then check the Han crossbow. You'll see what I'm talking about.

If you remember the picture above, that was a picture of a replica of a Roman crossbow (or pseudo-crossbow if all crossbows must be tension-powered). The picture says it's 28 by 21 centimeters, which is about less than a foot long by less than a foot wide. Unless you're really tiny (I'm not saying you are or you aren't--this is a general statement), that's quite easy to swing around unless you use lots of lead (but even then, modern rocket-propelled grenade launchers are a lot heavier and bulkier, but can still be swing around).

8. "Who cares about the rate of fire!" You would have made an excellent soldier in WWI.

Well, rate of fire isn't everything--I mean, a rocket launcher is a lot slower than a repeating, but I think a WWI German soldier would've liked one when he saw those British tanks. And would really prefer a light stick, which you could swing several times a minute, over a katana?

Spoiler :

Anyways, instead of flaming, here is my suggestion. Cite ANYTHING you guys have come up with and put the points and actually ANSWER my question, as in tell me a) What evidence do you have that the Han army could NOT put 100,000-300,000 troops into a battle(like Mobei, Battle took place in outer mongolia, Mobei meaning "North of Desert".)

I would if I could, but I hope I addressed the other points sufficiently.

and b) How is the ballista a crossbow despite its upwards trajectory, low rate of fire, and torsion.

Well, if a crossbow should be tension-powered and hand-held, a ballista is not a crossbow.

I also have another suggestion. Those who flame should leave, they don't contribute anything to the thread. I welcome a good debate with Dachs, Yui108, and some other contributors, but comments like the above I mentioned are just silly.

Well, silly comments are good ways to lighten up, that's what I say!

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Closed for review.