If we magically deleted all of the land between the two and forced them to fight, who would win? Both empires would be at their strongest for the time period.
>>65614629Rome had more experience fighting enemies that aren't retarded steppeniggers or themselves(on top of also steppeniggers and themselves) and adapted to new enemies constantly, and were capable of putting together campaigns and defensive efforts fairly quickly therefor they would be at an initial advantage vs the Chinese who had a much more cumbersome system, however the Chinese had such a vastly larger resource pool in terms of manpower and logistics that they would grind Rome down eventually. If the war is a one and done dash for a decisive victory Rome wins. If it drags on and several seasons pass China wins. Also of note that both locked horns with Huns and Persians and came out with similar lessons. And peak Rome would really be late 3rd century Rome with the proto-medieval equipment and a 1 million strong standing army, they looked nothing like that when they were militarily at their zenith.
They would end up tag teaming Persians demanding unreasonable rates along the silk road and steppe raiders. There would be Aneas gets trolled by Sun Wukong for the entire journey home until they have a true heart to heart.
>>65614629Depends on the strategic goal each wishes to achieve. Territorial expansion? To what extent? Who's the aggressor? Is it sea battles in the med or long marches and battles across northwestern China?
China has silk and steel Game over
>>65614899romans had steel
>>65614899China also has T-I-G-E-R-S. Rome doesn't have T-I-G-E-R-S.
>>65615345They will in the Colisseum for the matine showing of "criminals torn to shreds by animals", season 7
>>65614899How can one short post be so stupid?You could have said "a navy."
>>65614879Rome would definitely be fighting for territory because what else would they fight for? Meanwhile China's usual is getting more vassals or if that fails I guess trade rights.
>>65614629>no mention of a fucking date>"China" as if it existed and wasn't just a mess of warring states only occasionally united and never for longBrainlet thread.
>>65615456Want a specific date? Fuck it, 150 CE, a still-unified Roman Empire vs Han China.
>>65614629What blew up today?
>>65614831>peak Rome would really be late 3rd century Rome with the proto-medieval equipment and a 1 million strong standing army
>>65614629At least the chink armor looks like slop.
>>65614629>Magically delete the most fascinating part of the antique world
>>65614629China would mog easily for the sheer reason that it has a massive population advantage
>>65615739Other than Persia what else is fascinating about the lands between Rome and China? Central Asia? India??
>>65615795No up until year 1000 the Roman empire would have a higher or equal population with both somewhere in the 40 to 70 mil
>>65615843NTA but I think it was more the fact that such distances allowed entire empires to rise and fall just about completely isolated from each other, coming up with unique governments, cultures, and militaries. Without it, everything would be a lot more same-y and that sucks.Kinda like why animals from different parts of the world are cool, cause they evolved in isolation they can do weird stuff that they might not in other locations
>>65615473>CEYWNBARW
>>65615353They also did that to the Christians.
>>65615902>Not being a Christian means being a trannyDamn, the vast majority of the world is trans? That's crazy bro.
>>65615725The Romans had specialized lawn dart throwers? Breddy gud.
>>65615843>>65615896Central Asia. Kushans etc
>>65615931correct, vast majority of the world, colloquially known as brown turdies, are basically the trannies of civilization
Han are far more technologically advanced and have 300-500 pound crossbows.
>>65615957and other delusional drivel soulless chinksect malnets tell themselves
>>65615944Roman Legionaires were pelting their enemies with these things during any engagement.
>>65615896>just about completely isolated from each other, coming up with unique governments, cultures, and militariesNo. There is too much broad continuity, and taxing transcontinental trade was a big deal. They were not isolated from each other
>>65615957>300-500 pound crossbowsRomans had field portable ballista that could fire 70 lb rocks. Almost all Chinese heavy weapons of that period were wall mounted.
>>65615960Would be preferable to actually contribute to the thread like the anon above rather than bitterly screech about the Chinese.
>>65615965Oh how far they had fallen from the mighty pilum.
>>65614629Chinese crossbows are markedly superior, including to medieval European steel crossbows. They add a sear to the trigger+nut for more accuracy and have a 2-3x longer draw stroke. IIRC they had inferior siege engines, but then they had much thicker walls, canceling out any roman advantage there. Tactical advantage in the field goes to China IMO.
>>65615966They weren't completely isolated from each other but they were definitely isolated from each other enough that their cultures barely had any exchange.
>>65616032>their cultures barely had any exchangethat's the complete opposite of the truth
>>65616025The Chinese had the mangonel which was pretty good for when it was introduced but compared to medieval counterweight trebuchets it was outclassed.
>Han China stronk!I see the thirdies have found their new Russia to root for against the west.
>>65615795Underage, pls go.
>>65614629How did Han cavalry compare to roman? Again very dependant on time period, but roughly>early Rome, equites>pretty shit, mogged by numidians who didn't even need saddles>Roman empire, barbarian auxiliaries>pretty good, the best horsemen in Europe with the best of roman equipment>late empire, same auxiliaries + cataphtacts>auxiliaries have even better equipment and technology, plus professional institutions of heavy cavalry
>>65616008repeating the same stale shill lines aren't a contribution, anon, no matter how often you do it to bitterly screech against the West.
>>65616012No, you got issued two pilii and 3-5 plumbata. Throw each pilum while your lines approach. If you are in the front lines, gladius. If you are further back, you throw your plumbata using any of several techniques for range and accuracy. >>65616068>china >cavalryMore like armored messenger boys.
>>65614629rome had sarmatiansbut also italiansso who knows
>>65616068Cavalry didn't gain prominence until the Mongols and Medieval knights. It was all about the heavy infantry which Rome and China excelled as. If both empires clashed, China will win in the long run due to better logistics, unified command, unified bureacracy and more manpower.
>>65616053The Han dynasty stopped existing almost 2 millennia ago.
>>65616053Anon, you are the russification of the west. Stop enshittifying historical weapons discussion because you're insecure about facing modern competition
>pilum & plumbata versus crossbow hailRomaboos lose because they can't into newer missile weapons
>>65616111Perhaps I should've prefaced the response with NTA because you don't have the requisite intelligence to tell posters apart. Also nobody is "screeching against the West", this is a thread about two ancient empires, quit mewling about your vendetta against a modern nation.
>>65615960>>65616053>>65616111Stay in your Ukraine containment threads, tourist scum.
>>65616156>Stop enshittifying historical weapons discussion>he says, in the chink shill thread
>>65616159>Also nobody is "screeching against the West"first time in a chinkshill thread or just disingenous?
>>65616161Buddy, any thread involving China is a "chink shill thread" in your eyes, if you want an echo chamber you've no shortage, feel free to vacate to one of those.
>>65616150>and China excelled asat no point in history did china excell or even heavily invest in heavy infantry. they either copied the steppe invaders or relied on massed conscript levies.
>>65616166>any thread involving China is a "chink shill thread"99% are, courtesy of the last hundred or so previous chink threads on /k/. shouldn't have poisoned the well before trying this shit, little thirdie.
>>65616172If you're quite done seething over this "chink shill thread" then feel free to fuck off and stop disrupting it, or are you so starved for attention that shitting up random threads is your go-to?
>>65616179or what, are you going to report me to the wumao police for not letting you meet the quota?
>>65616182Very original and clever, and no, nothing will happen and you'll just continue to shit up the thread.
>>65616188that's right, i'll shit up the thread that shits up the board and you'll seethe impotently over your wasted effort making and bumping it.
Rome would assemble the two greatest armies ever seen and use them to plunge the empire into another civil war.
>>65616191>This thread is shitting up the board because it doesn't meet my view of what /k/ should look likeSo, shall we discuss the endless deluge of Russo-Ukrainian slop? Or something that is an actual issue rather than a historical thread that you decided to shit the bed over because it had the word "China" in it?
>>65616197chink shill threads are a refuge for vatniks and their thirdie quislings sucking up to chinks as their latest anti-west messiah. they are exactly at the core of the issue.
>>65616206You know what I find amusing about your getting triggered? The fact that nothing even remotely related to modern China has been mentioned, thus far the only China that has been discussed is a dynasty that died nearly 2 millennia ago because guess what? That's half of the point of this thread, not "muh CCP" or "muh second superpower".
>>65616222most of the statements about chinks itt have been unsupported memes propagated by CCP propaganda in the recent years and haven't ever been mentioned or described until the 1970s. pretending they've got nothing to do with the ccp and chink shilling won't work wumao. free tibet, taiwan numba wan, tiananmen square massacre, etc.
>>65616232Yes yes you're very original, did you think that would cause the CCP to reach through my Ethernet and disrupt my connection to the internet? Would've been a real shock if it had, judging by how I'm an American.
>>65616239>Yes yes you're very originalif you hadn't made the same shill thread with the same exact shill lines you'd get a more original response, alas you won't and you'll make another chink shill thread hyping up biggest historical steppe rapebabies using the same ccp shill lines in a week or two regardless.
>>65616239>judging by how I'm an American.lmao, and i'm the queen of England
>>65616243Alright, now I'm curious who you think I am and if we even inhabit the same reality because there wasn't a previous thread partially centered on ancient China in recent memory.
>>65616251>I'm curious who you think I amliterally any kind of global south maggot, you all behave the same.>because there wasn't a previous thread partially centered on ancient China in recent memorylol
Maybe I should use a name because the average denizen of /k/ can't tell posters apart to save their fucking lives.
>>65616254The more you type the more I'm convinced you spend an unreasonable amount of time going around just seething about those dastardly browns and their anti-West propaganda instead of something productive. I say this unironically: touch grass bro.
>>65616262i'm being productive by making /k/ a better place, the opposite of what you strive to do. no amount of crying and gaslighting will change that.
>>65616271Sure buddy, you're a real Messiah who will drag /k/ out of the darkness. I'm gonna head out, feel free to continue screaming your indignation over the board's state in my absence.
>>65616276nah, but i'm doing my part shitting on your slant eyed face all the same on the side and it takes zero effort for me to do, just like you do making these threads. you can keep crying and bitching about getting a taste of your own medicine but i'm certain you'll be here again peddling the same fictional garbage ina week or two like you already had been doing for months if not years.
