0
1

[–] Rollondger 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Interesting how the shape changed. I never knew that. More effective or less?

0
1

[–] protectdeeznuts [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

These shorter swords were more effective on foot the longer more effective on horse.

2
1

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

these swords were more effective on the sjw like pdn here, than on the smaller faggots.

0
1

[–] Rollondger 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Ah, that makes sense. What about of the lost of waisting? The pompeius seems less effective, yet cheaper to produce?

Or did the style of infantry fighting change? I'm not so well read on the late Roman battles.

2
0

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 2 points 0 points (+2|-2) ago 

oh look it's sjw trash!!

0
1

[–] novictim 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

FYI: Gaulic and German swords were more effective and of equal or higher technology.

What the Romans had was better organization, better strategy, and uniformity of production of their military kit and gear. And more than that, the Roman political system, unlike the Gauls and Germans, was able to suffer multiple defeats of their armies in the field and yet they could always reliably summon a fresh replacement force when needed. That is really how the Romans eventually defeat Hannibal and the Phoenicians. Not-so-great military tactics combined to an inexhaustible well of fresh resources = victory. SPQR, fuckers!

0
1

[–] protectdeeznuts [S] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Would you leave me nothing to post when the Germanic sub is featured?

0
1

[–] novictim 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Sorry, bub. My bad!

0
1

[–] novictim 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Et tu, Brute? Not I!

[–] [deleted] 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

[–] [deleted] 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] novictim 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Senator Biccus Dicus agrees!