Alexander the Great's empire vs WW2 germany.

Morals off, boodlust on.

battle ends in defeating or capture of either side

Battle takes place all over Germany.

Round 1: The entirety of Alexander the Great's empire with greek era technology (catapults, crossbows, etc) vs WW2 germany with WW2 tech.

Round 2: The entirety of Alexander's empire with WW2 technology (warplanes, etc) vs WW2 germany with the same WW2 technology.

Who wins? I'd like meduim-long educated reasons.

Edit: Alexander's men are trained in round 2 and understand weapons fully.

... guys with swords and chariots vs guys with rifles, tanks, and planes.

... I wonder who wins.

As for round 2, Alexander's men won't have any idea how to use WW2 weaponry and Alexander himself wouldn't know how to use the weapons to their true advantage. Assuming the scenario is changed so that they are sufficiently trained, a proper debate is not possible because it is entirely based on essentially fan fiction; no actual feats.

EDIT: Also, Alexander doesn't know the terrain. Germans do.

Germany wins, come on.... they have guns and machinery. Too far apart in time to compare fairly.

I'm gonna go with the side that has tanks and fighter planes over the one that's using swords and spears.

@Moonchilde said:

I'm gonna go with the side that has tanks and fighter planes over the one that's using swords and spears.

ROUND 1. Swords and spears

ROUND 2. WW2 tech.

@JediXMan said:

... guys with swords and chariots vs guys with rifles, tanks, and planes.

... I wonder who wins.

As for round 2, Alexander's men won't have any idea how to use WW2 weaponry and Alexander himself wouldn't know how to use the weapons to their true advantage. Assuming the scenario is changed so that they are sufficiently trained, a proper debate is not possible because it is entirely based on essentially fan fiction; no actual feats.

EDIT: Also, Alexander doesn't know the terrain. Germans do.

They are trained though, why would I give them tech and not have them be able to use and understand it?

@MasterJohn said:

@JediXMan said:

... guys with swords and chariots vs guys with rifles, tanks, and planes.

... I wonder who wins.

As for round 2, Alexander's men won't have any idea how to use WW2 weaponry and Alexander himself wouldn't know how to use the weapons to their true advantage. Assuming the scenario is changed so that they are sufficiently trained, a proper debate is not possible because it is entirely based on essentially fan fiction; no actual feats.

EDIT: Also, Alexander doesn't know the terrain. Germans do.

They are trained though, why would I give them tech and not have them be able to use and understand it?

So... you're basically saying Alexander vs Nazi generals with the exact same troops. That's what you're saying.

@JediXMan said:

@MasterJohn said:

@JediXMan said:

... guys with swords and chariots vs guys with rifles, tanks, and planes.

... I wonder who wins.

As for round 2, Alexander's men won't have any idea how to use WW2 weaponry and Alexander himself wouldn't know how to use the weapons to their true advantage. Assuming the scenario is changed so that they are sufficiently trained, a proper debate is not possible because it is entirely based on essentially fan fiction; no actual feats.

EDIT: Also, Alexander doesn't know the terrain. Germans do.

They are trained though, why would I give them tech and not have them be able to use and understand it?

So... you're basically saying Alexander vs Nazi generals with the exact same troops. That's what you're saying.

No, where did I say Alexander has german troops.

This is a scenario where alexander's empire is in greece, greece has the same technology as Germany, and they go head to head. Now would Alexander have greek or German warriors?

@MasterJohn said:

No, where did I say Alexander has german troops.

This is a scenario where alexander's empire is in greece, greece has the same technology as Germany, and they go head to head. Now would Alexander have greek or German warriors?

So featless Greek soldiers with guns vs Nazis....

Makes. No. Sense.

Using two armies of Germans makes more sense. But there are absolutely no feats to utilize to say who would win between a Greek and a German. Just that the Greeks here have some unexplained and dubious training, and are now fighting soldiers who we have actually seen at work.

Okay 
1)Alexander
2)Hitler 
What did you expect ?

@D3athstroke said:

Okay 1)Alexander2)Hitler What did you expect ?

Uh... I think you have that reversed...

@Hksaru:

It'd be like that... but ten times worse. Germans didn't fight in formation like that, and they had more automatic weapons.

Are we assuming Alexanders army and commanders can use the tech of WW2?

The Greeks would also likely have heavier horsemen and infantry, which makes no difference against bullets, and would serve to heavily encumber them esp. in the heavily forested regions of Germany. Germany was never conquered, not even by the Romans, so yeah this is such a slaughter for the Greeks.

Placing them against such an all around superior foe with far greater weaponry on the grounds which proved unconquerable in their time, and ages to come... hell, took all the superpowers of the modern world to finally conquer it, and even then it was arguably Mother Nature that was the deciding factor...

Alexander takes this because of feats. Germans have no feats other than losing armies to the cold

@SupermanWins465 said:

Alexander takes this because of feats. Germans have no feats other than losing armies to the cold

They ROFLstomped France.

There's no comic team in in this. So I believe this isn't meant to be in the Battles forums?

On-topic, though, round 1, the Germans rip them apart, How would troops in ancient times, using ancient technology, be able to stand a chance against modern technology? The Greek armor will do nothing but slow them down, as it won't actually protect them. What kind of a battle is this?

Round 2? So..... we have, on one side, a bunch of troops with no feats in regards to using modern technology, against those who have feats with modern technology? Again, what kind of a battle is this?

Germany wins both scenarios.

Scenario 1: Germans have WAY WAY more firepower, mobility, range, and communication efficiency. Alexander has no airplanes. Nough said.

Scenario 2: Alexander can't be assumed to be a skilled commander when we're working with modern weapons. Modern war is way more complicated than it was in ancient times and he has zero combat experience with airplanes. We've seen German feats (defeating France in a matter of weeks, taking over most of Europe in a lightning campaign, battling the modern British airforce and almost defeating it etc)

@SupermanWins465 said:

@Esquire: And? Name one country France hasn't surrendered to.

I know it's en vogue to make fun of France, but it would actually be a much shorter list to name countries they HAVE surrendered to. In fact, the entire modern stereo-type steams from how quickly they were captured during WW2.

Willful ignorance is both willful and ignorant.

@goblin123 said:

Germany wins both scenarios.

Scenario 1: Germans have WAY WAY more firepower, mobility, range, and communication efficiency. Alexander has no airplanes. Nough said.

Scenario 2: Alexander can't be assumed to be a skilled commander when we're working with modern weapons. Modern war is way more complicated than it was in ancient times and he has zero combat experience with airplanes. We've seen German feats (defeating France in a matter of weeks, taking over most of Europe in a lightning campaign, battling the modern British airforce and almost defeating it etc)

Yeah this explains it perfectly. Alexander has zero expertise with modern day weapons and tactics whereas the Germans have years worth of military tactics with modern day weapons. An easy win for the Germans.

Germany ftw

Round 1: Germany stomp worse than they ever have.

Round 2: Possibly Germany due to knowledge of terrain and probably due to having the desert fox..

And the onslaught of awful threads from MasterJohn continues, what idiocracy will he come up with next?

Batman...

@Moonchilde said:

Willful ignorance is both willful and ignorant.

This may be my single favorite response ever to a psuedo-troll.

@ShootingNova said:

There's no comic team in in this. So I believe this isn't meant to be in the Battles forums?

On-topic, though, round 1, the Germans rip them apart, How would troops in ancient times, using ancient technology, be able to stand a chance against modern technology? The Greek armor will do nothing but slow them down, as it won't actually protect them. What kind of a battle is this?

Round 2? So..... we have, on one side, a bunch of troops with no feats in regards to using modern technology, against those who have feats with modern technology? Again, what kind of a battle is this?

Alexander the great is in DC comics, though.

@Pwok21: it's not a stupid thread

@dondave:

Yes, it genuinely is.

It is a clear stomp in favour of the Germans and there is no other way of looking at it.

@Pwok21: they could take round 2, since MasterJohn edited the OP into they fully understand the modern weapons they are using

@MasterJohn: But if you are using real life Alexander, then I have no idea why you would even mention that.

@dondave:

The Germans have not only experience with the weapons and their capabilities exceeding what training Alexander the Great's force would be given and they also know the terrain, have advanced tactics and around 1500 years of combat knowledge over the opposing force.

This is a bad thread, end of argument.

@Pwok21: The OP specifically states that they full knowledge of the weapons.

And Hitler was an idiot, he not really a tactian

@dondave:

And regardless of knowledge of weapons there are still multiple reasons they stomp, which you promptly glazed over.

>implying that Hitler will be in control of forces and the fact that trench warfare won't stop the opposing army

Anyone who thinks Alexander would win is being utterly obtuse. The German military in WWII was over 20 million men strong at the beginning of the war. In comparison Alexanders army was not even 75 thousand men strong at its height. If it was literally empire vs empire Alexander would be crushed like nothing, It would be hard for him to even inflict a few hundred German casualties in round 1. In round 2 even if we assume equalized numbers there is no way the Greeks are as proficient with their weapons as the Germans and they still get crushed like nothing.

@Moonchilde said:

I'm gonna go with the side that has tanks and fighter planes over the one that's using swords and spears.

ROUND 1. Swords and spears

ROUND 2. WW2 tech.

@MasterJohn: Is this a joke? Just because Alexander was an influential general in his time doesn't mean he can just win anywhere he goes. He's honestly horribly overrated in my opinion. Yes he had an expansive empire, yes he won several battles, but that doesn't make him this master of all warfare. A general's only as good as the enemies he defeats and the Persians were so far spread that a few select battle ended them easily.

Round 1: doesn't even need to be here, its straight of spite. Alexander would have a tough time against Hannibal, this is ridiculous.

Round 2: Alexander still gets stomped. Even if Alexander and his Macedonians knew how to use the weapons they'd still get murderstomped:

1) almost no knowledge of the geography of most of Europe

2) exponentially smaller army than the Nazi's. Germans=millions, Alexander: a few thousand. Ancient army sizes aren't even comparable to modern ones.

3) no real tactics. a knowledge of how to use modern weapons isn't enough to master a tactical style with them. Alex's ancient tactics with modern weapons would never work.

4) Nazi generals would have studied military history and tactics and know Alexander's style of warfare as well as many other famous and arguably better generals.

modern warfare evolved over centuries until it reached near perfection with blitzkrieg. alexander dies in both

Alexander one shot

Jee i don't know... the guys who have guns, tanks and airplanes?

WW1 Germany couldn't beat WW2 Germany, and they had the far better army because...no Nazi's. But yeah, this thread is basically dumb.

A few tanks with sufficient gas would solo round 1.

The nazis still stomp round 2 on account of Alexander's men having no clue on using tech from 2000 years in the future