Since it has already been well established that Germanic Knights are entirely superior to Tartar horse archers in the literature, may I ask how brutal a theoretical Teutonic conquest of the Golden Horde would have been?
>>18002553have you considered not being a dumb mutt?
>>18002553>(unsubstantiated claim)>(retarded question) Your IQ is below 80
>>18002584>>18002597You can't refute him
>>18002553>>18002605It depends on how many Tatars you're talking about. A small number of knights may defeat larger number of Tartars. But they would probably just retreat faster than a bunch of heavily armored knights could follow then start raiding your supply trains and night camps with archers. By then more Tartars would have shown up like sharks in a feeding frenzy and decimated them.
>>18002605Knights in a siege have an advantage but in the open steppe they are going to have a hard time dealing with Parthian tactics
>>18002553About as brutal as any conquest the Teutonic order undertook.
>>18002553>Since it has already been well established that Germanic Knights are entirely superior to Tartar horse archers>citation needed
>>18002553ACK!
>>18003580>>18003637ACK!
>>18002553It would have worked the exact same way as in the baltics: the order calls for immigration from Germany to create a local encastellated feudal web and any tartar civilian caught in it would be forced to submit or be slaughtered.You might think that knights would destroy horse archers in battle, and certainly heavy cavalry is nowhere near as vulnerable to their tactics as infantry would be, but the actual key issue is that civilizing the steppe would take a hell of a lot more investment while returning far less resources, so it's highly unlikely any ruler would lend the knights his support.
>pagans run to kill, asking for help from their god and sacrificing people right on the battlefield>medieval Christians kill people in the name of their godWhat's the difference?
>>18003656>random battle no one has heard about and which has nothing to do with the thread's topicbravo
Exterminating nomads was a common medieval policy. A victorious Teutonic conquest would probably involve mass killings, deportations, and forced settlement of surviving Tatars.
>>18003943meds now
>>18002553While they are superior on the battlefield, they can't just ignore geography, logistics and the socio-political structure of the steppes. They would not be able to beat the Tartars on their own territory without having Tartars on their own. On the steppe you can only fight horse archers with your own horse archers.
>>18004710False, they could easily have built a series of well defended castles down the Volga river. If the Tartars attempted to siege the castles the knights could simply spread supplies via boatway.
>>18005279Volga Bulgars, East Slavs, Magyars and Poles and many others did exactly this, yet still Great Bull of Europe Batu rekt them so hard that they have been seething for 8 centuries
>>18002553I really wonder what nationality you are. Not a Western European because neuroses don't line up, but a Pole wouldn't be caught dead lionizing the Teutonic Knights, too chuddy to be a regular svidomite, maybe a Balt or a Finn?
>>18005279>Just build a bunch of Motte and Bailey forts with borrowed money which the Mongols will just ride around and easily destroy.
пиcя
should have sowed the steppe with plants poisonous to horses
>>18003865victory
>>18002553>may I ask how brutal a theoretical Teutonic conquest of the Golden Horde would have beenToo kino for this gay Earth.
>>18003967He's actually right. It's in medieval letters too. It's why rabbinics kept getting exiled and executed, but also they made a bad name for everyone else.
What would be the peak of medieval armor development if firearms never existed? I don't like the latest (15-16 centuries) full plate models due to their poor mobility, and I think they were developed in such a way due to firearms. How would an agile and dexterous warrior look like on the peak of armor development?
>>18006378>I don't like the latest (15-16 centuries) full plate models due to their poor mobility, and I think they were developed in such a way due to firearmsArticulation actually kept geting better all the way to the 17th century, it's just that with professionalization armies started to favor cheap munition armor for mass distribution.
>>18005355It's american or a race traitor russian>>18003637Saw that painting in person when I visited Poland a few years back, genuinely gorgeous
