User blog comment:MilenHD/Cesare Borgia vs Gustavus Adolphus/@comment-379205-20150813171457

119's "Lion of the North" Edges


 * Swords: The Schiavona has a more versatile double-edged blade for cutting and slashing, as well as a basket hilt to protect the hand and wrist. Edge: Gustavus


 * Polearms: The Halberd provides more options, able to pierce, cut, and pull off horseback. The Bec de corbin can hook, pierce, and bludgeon, but a sharp weapon is more likely to kill in one strike than a blunt one. Edge: Gustavus


 * Firearms: Both are matchlock weapons, but in the 100 years or so between them, the tactics, training of musketeers and, to a lesser degree, design improved, giving Gustavus the definitive edge.


 * Ranged: The two weapons are hard to compare directly. The arbalest is a long-range, high-powered crossbow, the pistol is a weapon used for horseback or in close combat. The arbalest is more accurate and has a longer range, but the pistols can end a sword fight before it begins at point blank range, and soldiers often carried at least two, meaning multiple shots. On the other hand, they often could not reload them in battle given the range they were used at. This one is difficult, so Even, advantage dependent on range.

X-Factors:

Armor: Yeah, Cesare has a slight edge there. On the other hand, with the more widespread use of muskets and pistols by the time of Gustavus, cuirasses were about the only piece of armor that could be made at least partially bulletproof without restricting freedom of movement- Cesare's gauntlets and helmet are probably not be thick enough to save him from a musket ball- or perhaps even a pistol bullet- plate armor was not a uniform thickness- areas with moving parts- visors and gauntlets were lighter and weaker.

Brutality: Cesare was more brutal and committed some heinous atrocities, but is that really an advantage, or really just a sign of a deranged sociopath who may be more likely to make fatal mistakes?

Tactics: Gustavus takes this one easily with his revolutionary military tactics which are the forerunners to modern combined arms tactics- his use of artillery, cavalry, and infantry in together in a manner to create a breakthrough and exploit the advantage. Cesare was really just a mediocre commander who stood out for his brutality.

Training: Gustavus also introduced cross-training for his troops- every soldier in his army could handle a pike in formation and fire a musket accurately. They were even trained in fighting on horseback and firing a cannon. Again, similar ideas are used (at least to the degree it is feasible given more advanced modern weapons) today- a rifleman can handle a machine gun or a rocket launcher if the gunner goes down. Cesare didn't really contribute to modern training or tactics. Edge: Gustavus

Calm under fire: With his innovated tactics and ability to use them while leading his men in battle, Gustavus is clearly cooler headed of the two. Like I said, Cesare is a psychopath who cares little for the lives of his men or those of any civilians unfortunate enough to be caught in his path of destruction, and simply crushes the enemy with brute force. Also a factor is that Cesare widely used mercenaries, who have a nasty habit of retreating when things start to go badly- you can't collect a payment if you're dead!

Overall Winner: Gustavus Adolphus wins this easily; The Lion from the North curb stomps the psychotic son of a Pope in this battle! Gustavus takes this victory thanks to his superior weaponry, as well as the tactical brilliance to bring them to bear effectively, and the cross-training of his men, which allow them to effectively use all the weapons in his arsenal.