User blog comment:Deathblade 100/Conquerors, Legions and Blood: Roman Empire vs Alternate Aztecs (Crusaders Kings 2)/@comment-27358240-20200213133649/@comment-27358240-20200213225037

I do agree with you on many regards here, thanks for pointing out my flaws. It is true that it wasn't only under Caesar that Rome defeated enemies who outnumbered them. However, my point still stands that just because the Romans did defeat enemies against all odds, didn't mean they always did. The battle of Aquae Sextiae only followed three crushing defeat of the Romans at the hands of the Germanic coalition. At Zama, on the other hand, the estimates I see put the number difference at around 5000, and even then it was done by Scipio, just as much of a genius mastermind as Caesar. My point wasn't to show that the Romans couldn't defeat armies who vastly outnumbered them. It was more to show that we can't rely on the accounts of their victory while ignoring those of their defeats.