User blog comment:MilenHD/Persian Immortal vs Mongol Horsemen/@comment-17814994-20160606041701

Elgb's "Battle of the Empire Builders" EDGES!!!

Short: Well this is an obvious edge for the Ild. Both weapons will be used on horses, so the Ild's longer and more curved blade, as well as it's sharper steel metallurgy, will beat the Acinaces. It doesn't help that the Mongol's pony and cavalry specialization will double the effectiveness of the Ild. EDGE: Mongols

Mid: Funny as this may seem but I'm actually giving the edge to the spear. The glaive is definately the longer weapon with the nastier looking blade, but it's an infantry polearm priamrily designed to be used on foot and in hand-to-hand combat. The spear is effective on both chariot and on foot, and in the hands of a charioteer, it can be a very accurate and powerful weapon. EDGE: Immortals

Long: Both bows look very similar, but I believe that the Mongols have the more powerful weapon as well as better marksmanship in this comparison. Persian bows were very deadly but they weren't use for accurate long range sniping. Don't get me wrong, Persian archers were accurate individually, but they were more used to raining down their arrows or using them in chariots or horses to get close. The Mongols were renown for their accuracy with their bows. They specialized in hitting their targets on faster moving horses, and they were so good that they can even use archer cavalry for siege warfare. In terms of arrows, the steel-tip armor-piercing arrows of the Mongols definately win. EDGE: Mongols

Special: I gotta give this one to the sagaris. A flanged mace is a great blunt force weapon, but the sagaris axe can also do that plus the ability to do more push cuts on flesh. A weapon that can both bash and chop is easily the better weapon. EDGE: Immortals

X-Factors: In terms of training, I gotta give this one to the Immortals. They specialized both on foot and chariot combat, and probably have studied more styles of warfare than the Mongols (the latter needed to adopt techniques of other countries to learn more styles such as seige warfare). In terms of anything else, the Mongols beat the Immortals by a mile. They have better the mettalurgy and technology, have fought in a larger span of territories, were better marksmen and cavalrymen, and were far more brutal. EDGE: Mongols

Deadliest Warrior?

If this was an on foot battle, the Immortal may have stood a better chance of winning. But in a fast-moving battle with horses, the Mongol's better melee and long range weapons would win. They carry the better steel weapons and other technologies here. The Immortals' scythe chariot was a deadly weapon of its time, but the sadly they soon began to be replaced by single horses that became more maneuverable and durable overtime. And the Mongol is carrying technologies such as stirrups, horse harnesses and better saddles that makes them far faster and far more maneuverable than the flimsy chariot.

These stirrups and all the other equipments I mentioned, is the reason why people in the Middle Ages didn't use chariots or formations anymore. Mounted warfare was the new thing; it's faster, more mobile and can create more shock and awe in battle. And the Mongols were the best of this, and it would surely beat any technologies or combat styles the Ancient World once produced.