User blog comment:Urbancommando77/Mongols VS Saxons/@comment-24189690-20140410044028

Close Range Weaponry: Going with the Turco Mongol Sabre here. The reason for this is due to the difference in length. The Sabre had a length of typically 123 centimeters, while the longsword has a smaller 75 centimeters. This gives the Mongols a better reach with their weapon. As for the dagger and the seax, the two are comparable enough for me to call it even between them. Edge: Mongol

Mid Range Weaponry: Going with the Boar Spear. The reason for this is that the glaive was a much longer weapon. While this is good for the Mongolians in close combat, the glaive is much more unwieldy than the boar spear. Not only that, but the boar spear is a tactical advantage for the Saxons, as it is one of their only weapons to stop the Mongolian Horses if they ge ta lucky hit. Edge: Saxons

Long Range Weaponry: Mongolian Recurve Bow takes it here. While they may be less effective against advanced chainmail, the Saxons used chainmail in a less modern way, and instead used Byrnies. As such, the Recurve Bow has more effectiveness, due to the Mongolians being amazing fighters. The composite crossbow was deemed a great weapon, due to the ability for an untrained man to kill a trained knight. That being said however, the Mongolians are expert horse and foot archers. Archery is much more their primary weapon than the Saxons. Edge: Mongolians

Special: Flanged Mace. This is because, as with the glaive, the Dane Axe is much bigger, heavier, and unwieldy than the mace. While the Saxons reportedly killed horses with these monstroud axes, Mongolians prefer to engage in ranged combat. The flanged mace gives the Mongolian a tactical advantage of bashing through the chainmail and the helmet the Saxons are using. Edge: Mongolians

Armor: Usually, I would go for chainmail here. After all, it is efficient at stopping weapons that the Mongols got an edge on. That being said, however, the chainmail is heavier than the leather lamellar. When fighting the Mongols, the worst thing one can do is become easily exhausted. Mongolian armor may not be stronger, but for them, thats fine. All they need is mobility and the ability to shoot. Edge: Mongolians

The Mongolians come from a later era than the Saxons, where their tactics are more refined. In the battle, the Mongolians will have four horsemen. As the Saxons have no horses, these horsemen alone, with the right maneuverability, can easily outrun them. While it seems that the terrain is to the Saxons favor, the Mongolians have fought in similar areas, such as Russia, whose harsh winters decimated Napoleon and Hitler. Horses CAN be used in forests, just not in large amounts. And in these amounts, the Mongolians can still use their horses effectively. The problem that they face is that the Saxons know the environment, and may try to commence sneak attacks. That being said, however, Mongolians would still have the advantage of superior ranged firepower and melee weaponry. The Saxons picked a fight with an enemy centuries moe advanced than they were, with better weapons and armor to combat them. Dieing in their homeland is just a small solace. For those of you wondering about the Saxon's shields, they cannot be used effectively in this battle to form an infamous shield wall, as it would require more men. Mongolian archers are generally better trained and disciplined than the melee orientated Saxons. Even with the environment turned against them, the Mongolians, in my opinion, prevail. Winner: Mongolians