User blog comment:Manofgod/King David vs Count Roland (Battle of the Holy Warriors!)/@comment-4661256-20170510074143/@comment-4661256-20170511063655

All right, I can see there's been a misunderstanding. Hard to read intent online, after all. First and foremost, I would like to offer an apology if my words were too biting. I can always be nicer when I get my point across. The reason I was miffed was because I thought you were calling me out in a sneaky way. I can see now this was not your intent.

Likewise, my recent "warpath" against battles of this type is because I genuinely think there exists a Wiki-wide issue with users making comparisons between warriors with thousand-year tech gaps between them. Yes, strategy and tactics overcome tech, as can things like logistics, training/experience, and the like. The thing is, though, technology is a variable that we can definitively interpret: this sword has a longer reach, is more durable, more versatile, etc.

These claims can be backed up or refuted by measurements. The other x- factors are way harder to quantify or even qualify. This being the inherent flaw in the nature of our battles, I believe we should try to mitigate this discrepancy where possible. The burden of proof lies with you to say that David is a better strategist-- so much superior that he can beat an opponent who I can easily prove enjoys many centuries' worth technological advantages. Perhaps now that I have explained more calmly, and in a respectful fashion, we can work towards seeing common ground.