User blog comment:Laquearius/Deadliest Warrior Rematch: Alexander the Great vs Attila the Hun/@comment-27358240-20181122083205

Kazanshin "Discount Mongol vs Spartan" edges:

Heavy Infantry:  This is quite easy. The Allied infantry may strike first with their relatively long-ranged weapons like their angon and francisca, but as soon as they run out of that, they're doomed. The only chance I see them having would be of charging against the thousands of pikes and managing to engage inside the range of the pikes, at which point the long weapons would be useless. However, in a realistic scenario, the allied soldiers would be ripped apart by the time they get close enough, at which point the hypaspists will finish them off. Edge: Alexander the Great

Light infantry: For this one, I'm going against the grain and giving the edge to Attila. Sure, the macedonians might be 2000 men more numerous, but as stated below by Elgb, self bow<Composite bow, especially in these kind of battles where the composite bows only have to aim at an area and rain down arrows in order to hit something. The peltasts will also be outmatched by the allied skirmishers, mainly because of the wicker shield's relative inefficacity. Edge: Attila the Hun

Cavalry: This is Attila's bread and butter. First off, the Hunnic horsw archers will outmatch the Persian/Macedonian one, no contest. Better armor, can go into melee combat and are likely much more skilled horsemen. While Alexander has the endge in melee cavalry, I think the overwhelming advantage of long range cavalry gives the advantage to the Huns. Edge: Attila the Hun

Tactics: Easy one. Alexander never lost a single battle, while Attila did, against much less impressive foes than what Alexander fought. Alexander forged the greatest empire of his time, which is why he's known as the great, and Attila really only sacked some cities and beat a weakened Rome, which he didn't even conquer in the end. Edge: Attila the Hun

X-Factors: This pretty much reflects the tactics edges. Alexander is simply the better man and general compared to Attila. sure, Attila has superior metallurgy, but everything else goes to Alexander. Edge: Alexander the Great

Final Verdict: I really want to vote for Attila, because I love horse archers. I've been invited to represent Canada in the anual Yabusame competition over here in Japan and gave a speech on what we, as foreigners, thought of this custom. I also love myself some long range advantage, something which I always emphasize on both when comparing two warriors or playing Total War games. However, in this case, I have to gove the victory to the better man, the better tactitian and the better general, which is Alexander the Great. Horse archers will be tough opponents, but its nothing Alexander hasn't faced before. Basically, anything Attila has, Alexander has defeated before. Alexander will be outsmarting and outmatching Attila the whole time, surrounding him, getting to his flanks and rear and striking in whatever way Attila wouldn't expect him to. All in all, the Hun may be tenacious and ferocious, but Alexander is just the far better leader. Winner: Alexander the Great