User blog comment:LB&SCR/Thus unto the breach: San Sebastián's Hope vs. Alamo Defenders/@comment-17814994-20160724052725

Elgb's "The Unstoppable Force Meets The Immovable Object" EDGES!!!

Rifle: The Kentucky long rifle was one of the first known rifles in history, but it wasn't designed as a military weapon. It was a hunter's and frontiersmen's rifle that was designed for hunting game, hence the very long and heavy barrel and the reason why it was used predominantly for skirmishes and ambushes than actual large-scale battlefields. The Baker rifle was designed as one of the first "military" rifle in warfare, and was lighter and less wieldly than the Kentucky long rifle. It also has the larger caliber so that helps too. EDGE: SS Hope

Musket: First things first, while both weapons have the same range, I have to disagree since the Springfield's maximum range is actually at least 200 yards. While the Brown Bess can fire a round more than the Springfield, the Springfield can still fire twice its range. That range advantage works perfectly well for the Alamo Defenders since they are in the defense and can just use snipe the SS off before they can get close. The problem with the Brown Bess is that, while it has the slightly faster rate of fire, the SS are fighting in the open against people who are well-covered and staring at them with the longer range muskets. This will nullify the Brown Bess' reload speed adavntage since the SS will be having difficulty relaoding as the Alamo Defenders fire at them in the comfort of their fort. EDGE: A. Defenders

Melee: I have to give this one to the bayonet and sword. They both offer practicality, speed and length than the Alamo Defender's bowie knife and tomahawk. While the latter's weapons can be thrown, the Texans are no Indians so they probably won't be throwing their tomahaks in this battle. EDGE: SS Hope

X-Factors: I agree with all the x-factors. But I will give the tactical edge to the SS Hope. While their initial charges failed and cost them a lot of casualties, with the right reinforcements they learned and adapted from their mistakes to secure a win. The Alamo Defenders where brave but were incredibly foolish. They underestimated their enemies, and they wouldn't be cut off and surrounded in the first place if they didn't got careless. EDGE: SS Hope

Deadliest Warrior?

This may sound crazy but I'm actually giving the edge to the Alamo Defenders. While the Forlorn Hope had the best rifle and the best melee weapons, I believe that the Alamo Defenders would have killed them first before they can even get close to the walls. I have to look at the battles that these two have fought. The SS Hope lost a lot of men trying to breach the city, but the thing is they wouldn't have taken it without the help of their cannons, sappers and mines. The diversionary attack on the East Side was actually to gain area for the British to use artillery, not to attack the French with their infantry. The Alamo Defenders on the other hand, fought against trained soldiers and canons as well. But in this battle, the SS Hope doesn't have the luxury of cannons or artillery to breach the Alamo. While they have reinforcements, as long as they don't have canons they'll only be tragets to the superior range and accuracy of the Alamo rifles and muskets.

Come to think of it, It's actually a very lopsided battle, the Alamo Defenders have four weapons instead of three, their rifles, muskets, melee and the actual Alamo, which had thick adobe walls that can withstand pounding from light artillery and a three day siege. Those walls give the Defenders cover and sniping positions to drop the British as they march forward in the open. The SS Hope on the other hand, just doesn't have the weapons to breach those walls and they will be instantly killed as they get close.