Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: KS_Al on March 25, 2004, 07:45:03 pm
-
What are the greatest battles in the world?
these battles are chosen by historians. they are not in order these are a list. Anyway if you feel you need to add any feel pleased to do so.
1. Battle of the Alamo- it showed what Americans (clerks, shoemen lawyers, and frontiersman) can do when they fight for their freedoms and for their homes. 150 Americans surrounded by the Mexican Army, a well trained army led by Santa Anna, numbered 2500-4000 men besieging the fort. The Americans repelled several attacks and held them for 2 weeks (around that). Casualties were around 1000 for the Mexicans to 150 combatants for the Americans. Famous ppl such as Jim Bowie, William B. Travis and the famous Davie Crockett fought in the battle and died to the last man. Even though there were couple of survivors the relatives of the soldiers. the signifigance of this battle was. the texans were inexpierenced in war and they fought the hardest and caused alot of casualties to the Mexicans.
Add more!
-
another battle would be The invasion on D-day (operation Overlord)
Many canadians and British and US soldiers fought on this bloody day. 3 waves were sent. the 1st wave was uneffective and caused many casualties. 2nd and 3rd waves were effective and soon by then they broke the German lines and had won. D-day was the day marked of beginning of ending of Nazi Germany.
-
Battle of Bulge
The Battle of the Bulge which lasted from December 16, 1944 to January 28, 1945 was the largest land battle of World War II in which the United States participated. More than a million men fought in this battle including some 600,000 Germans, 500,000 Americans, and 55,000 British. The German military force consisted of two Armies with ten corps(equal to 29 divisions). While the American military force consisted of a total of three armies with six corps(equal to 31 divisions). hitler had gambled his own reserves for this counter-attack but failed. But he caught the allies by surprise. The 101st Airborne which was surrounded fought off german attacks. At the conclusion of the battle the casualties were as follows: 81,000 U.S. with 19,000 killed, 1400 British with 200 killed, and 100,000 Germans killed, wounded or captured.
-
One of the most decisive battles of the Napoleonic Wars, Waterloo was fought in a small area (some 10km by 4km) on the main road leading south from Brussels.
It was the first clash of the Titans - Napoleon Bonaparte versus the Duke of Wellington - and it was a win all/lose all scenario.
Bonaparte had brilliantly outmanouevred both the Anglo-Allied force of (68,000) under Wellington and the nearby Prussian army of Field Marshal Blucher (89,000).
Together the allied forces easily outnumbered France's 72,000 men (Bonaparte) and its detached right-wing corps of 33,000 (Marshal Grouchy), so the French emperor surprised the two by getting in between them and preventing their linking.
On 16 June, Bonaparte had beaten the Prussians at Ligny, while at the same time Wellington had held a vital set of crossroads at Quatre Bras against an inept Marshal Ney.
Turning his main strength towards the British, Bonaparte detached Grouchy to keep the Prussians retreating and away from Wellington.
The emperor found the Anglo-Allied drawn up across a small ridge at Mont St John, just south of the village of Waterloo, and organised his troops for battle the next day as a massive storm drenched the ground.
At dawn it was decided the ground was too boggy to launch an immediate attack and so the armies faced off against each other.
The British position was linked with various strongpoints - the chateau of Hougoumont, the farmhouse of La Haye Sainte and the dwellings of La Haie and Papelotte - and while Wellington knew his troops could hold the French for a time, he was relying upon the promised arrival of Blucher on his left flank to ensure victory.
Bonaparte began the battle at about 11.30am with salvoes from his massed artillery and then sent an initial assault, intended as a diversion to draw enemy reserves away, against Hougoumont on the British right flank.
Far from sucking in Allied men, the battle for the chateau would rage all day and would tie up more than 10,000 French troops in a bitter struggle against 2000 British Guardsmen.
At 1.30, following a half-hour bombardment, D'Erlon's I Corps moved against the central bastion of La Haye Sainte.
Already terrorised by the shelling, the brittle Dutch-Belgians under Bylandt broke and ran as more than 18,000 French bayonets advanced towards them.
The advancing blue coats then overran the orchard and garden at La Haye Sainte, forced a detachment of 95th riflemen out of a strong position in a gravel pit near the farmhouse, and then a small force separated and set to capturing the main building, which was being defended by the King's German Legion.
The remaining men under D'Erlon pushed on towards the small ridge the British were formed behind.
As the French moved from column to line formation the British 5th Division, under General Picton, stood up and fired a devestating volley into the surprised attackers. Then, before they could recover, Picton ordered a bayonet charge but was shot through the head and killed while leading it.
Continuing to advance, the British were threatened by cuirassiers, formed square and immediately found themselves cut off and under attack from infantry as well as horsemen.
Seeing the impending disaster, the British cavalry commander Lord Uxbridge ordered his heavy cavalry into action and the famous Charge of the Scots Greys began.
Realising the importance of the position, neither side would give quarter and bloody hand-to-hand fighting tested the mettle, and resolve, of all.
To bolster his outnumbered defenders, Bonaparte sent in a division of the Young Guard and, when they too began to be forced backwards, he sent in two battalions of his elite Old Guard. In a stunning attack, the Old Guard shattered 14 Prussian battalions and by 7pm the French lines were able to regroup.
Just before 6pm, Ney seemed to regain his military prowess, and launched a combined attack with cavalry, infantry and artillery.
This time the French were able to hold the British in square through the threat of cavalry attack. But this time the accompanying infantry and artillery tore great holes in the dense ranks with musket and cannon fire.
The British resolve, so indomitable in the years of war to date, began to weaken. Hours of absorbing huge casualties had left the army dangerously wounded and finally La Haye Sainte fell in the centre.
Ney immediately positioned an artillery battery there and in order to hold the centre Wellington called in all his reserves.
Despite being like a boxer staggering and awaiting the knock-out blow, the Allied troops held on only to be faced by a sight that had terrified many fresh armies - the advance of the Imperial Guard.
In one final attempt to deal with Wellington, Bonaparte threw his undefeated veterans at the recalcitrant thin red line, which buckled under the strain.
The moment of victory was at hand when upon Wellington's command, 1500 Guardsmen stood immediately in front of their French counterparts and stopped the advance with a withering point-blank series of volleys.
The Chasseurs of the Guard finally reeled away in disorder and the sight of their retreat sent panic through Bonaparte's ranks.
The disintegration of a once-proud army into a mass of panicking men took place almost within a blink of an eye and Bonaparte's dreams, and reputation, lay shattered.
The British and Prussian pursuit was relentless and prevented any chance of French consolidation.
The battle to end Bonaparte's hold on power had been a costly one. Wellington lost 15,000 men, Blucher 7000, and Bonaparte 32,000, with at least another 7000 captured.
-
All 3 were pretty minor.
Alamo was a petty little thing.
D-Day was big but it was overshadowed by the Russian offensive which took place around the same time, Operation Bagration. Btw most historians would say that Stalingrad was the beginning of the end for Nazi germany.
Bulge was pretty minor compared to some of the battles on the eastern front like Kursk or Stalingrad.
Lots of other battles that eclipse all 3 in scale, somme or Gallipoli for example.
-
The battle of Thermopolae (sp?), in which 300 Spartans defended a mountain pass against the the entire Persian army. They were defeated in the end, but the time they bought allowed the Greek city states to marshall their defences and drive back the Persians.
-
the battle of britain
Battle of Midway
-
the US Civil War
Gettysburg Campaign (June-August 1863)
Date(s): July 1-3, 1863
Principal Commanders: Maj. Gen. George G. Meade [US]; Gen. Robert E. Lee [CS]
Forces Engaged: 158,300 total (US 83,289; CS 75,054)
Estimated Casualties: 51,000 total (US 23,000; CS 28,000)
Gen. Robert E. Lee concentrated his full strength against Maj. Gen. George G. Meade’s Army of the Potomac at the crossroads county seat of Gettysburg. On July 1, Confederate forces converged on the town from west and north, driving Union defenders back through the streets to Cemetery Hill. During the night, reinforcements arrived for both sides. On July 2, Lee attempted to envelop the Federals, first striking the Union left flank at the Peach Orchard, Wheatfield, Devil’s Den, and the Round Tops with Longstreet’s and Hill’s divisions, and then attacking the Union right at Culp’s and East Cemetery Hills with Ewell’s divisions. By evening, the Federals retained Little Round Top and had repulsed most of Ewell’s men. During the morning of July 3, the Confederate infantry were driven from their last toe-hold on Culp’s Hill. In the afternoon, after a preliminary artillery bombardment, Lee attacked the Union center on Cemetery Ridge. The Pickett-Pettigrew assault (more popularly, Pickett’s Charge) momentarily pierced the Union line but was driven back with severe casualties. Stuart’s cavalry attempted to gain the Union rear but was repulsed. On July 4, Lee began withdrawing his army toward Williamsport on the Potomac River. His train of wounded stretched more than fourteen miles.
-
Battle of Carthage? would be one anyway info on it......
rome vs Carthage
The Romans, however, very shrewdly decided to fight the war through the back door. They knew that Hannibal was dependent on Spain for future supplies and men, so they appointed a young, strategically brilliant man as proconsul and handed him the imperium over Spain. This move was unconstituional, for this young man had never served as consul. His name: Publius Cornelius Scipio (237-183 BC). Scipio, who would later be called Scipio Africanus for his victory over Carthage (in Africa), by 206 had conquered all of Spain, which was converted into two Roman provinces. Hannibal was now left high and dry in Italy.
Scipio then crossed into Africa in 204 BC and took the war to the walls of Carthage itself. This forced the Carthaginians to sue for peace with Rome; part of the treaty demanded that Hannibal leave the Italian peninsula. Hannibal was one of the great strategic generals in history; all during his war with Rome he never once lost a major battle, although he had lost a couple small skirmishes. Now, however, he was forced to retreat; he had, despite winning every battle, lost the war. When he returned to Carthage, the Carthaginians took heart and rose up against Rome in one last gambit in 202 BC. At Zama in northern Africa, Hannibal, fighting against Scipio and his army, met his first defeat. Rome reduced Carthage to a dependent state; Rome now controlled the whole of the western Mediterranean including northern Africa.
-
Pearl Harbour.
Battle of Britain.
-
:wtf: Pearl Harbour wasn't really a battle.
-
The defeat of Athens, the end of the peloponnesian war.
-
the Battle of Agincourt
I admire the British for this battle.
Both armies rose before dawn and assembled for battle, the English numbering 5000 archers and 900 men-at-arms and the French between 20-30,000. The rules of chivalry dictate that the field of battle should favor neither side but the French freely took up a position that was disadvantageous to them. They assembled perhaps 1000 yards apart, separated by a recently ploughed field. A slight dip between them ensured that the armies were in full view of each other. Either side of the field was bordered by forest that narrowed from 1200 yards where the French assembled to only 900 where the armies could be expected to meet. This greatly restricted the free movement that the French would require to exploit their far greater numbers, preventing them from outflanking and enveloping the smaller force.
The English formed into a single line, with no reserves, into three groups of men-at-arms, comprising the advance, mainbody and rearguard, each around four deep. The right was commanded by the Duke of York, the center by Henry and the left by Lord Camoys. There is some debate as to the formation of archers. The traditional view is that each the three groups of men-at-arms were separated by a large wedge of archers with a body of archers on each flank. This would allow the archers to fire on the French not only from the front but also the flank. More recent research suggests that this would have considerably weakened the line. If heavily armed men-at-arms were to come in contact with a body of lightly armed archers, they could be expected to quickly disperse them breaking the line. As such, the archers would have been positioned on the flanks, in accordance with usual English practice, 2,500 to a side, angled forward to allow converging fire on any attack to the lines center.1. This formation was to have important consequences later in the battle.
It is possible that a small formation of archers may have been positioned in the Tramcourt woods to the rear of the French lines. Its role would be to cause confusion in the French ranks and divert troops from the main battle. As the French advanced to make contact with the main English body, they would also have been in a position to provide flanking fire. The existance of such a force has been vigorously denied by English chroniclers.
The French formed three lines, the first two made up of dismounted men-at-arms and the third mounted. Cavalry was placed on each flank, 1600 commanded by the Count of Vendome on the left and 800 commanded by Clignet de Brebant on the right. On the flanks to the rear, some ineffectual cannon were placed that never fired more than a few shots during the battle. Between the first and second lines were placed the archers and crossbowmen. The reality of the French lines, however, was far different. Every French nobleman wanted to be in the first line and to have his banner prominently displayed. This resulted in much jostling for position, crowding out the archers and crossbowmen to the flanks so that the first two lines became more or less one large chaotic mass. "The strength of the armies of Philip and John of Valais was composed of a fiery and undisciplined aristocracy that imagined itself to be the most efficient military force in the world, but was in reality little removed from an armed mob"2.
The two sides thus assembled, waited unmoving for four hours from about 7am to about 11am. The wise counsel of d'Albret and Boucicaut prevailed, at least temporarily, arguing that they should let the English attack where their inferior numbers would have placed them at a greater disadvantage. In fact, it was argued that they should not attack at all and let the English starve. In such a way, the English would be defeated without having to give battle. The French, still confident of victory, used this time to jostle for position, eat, settle quarrels and throw insults at the English. While many sat, some remained standing as not to muddy their armor. One thousand yards away, Henry knew that they would have to fight that day as his troops, without food, would only get weaker. On council from his advisors, he ordered the English advance
The English quietly and steadily advanced on the French position to within extreme longbow range (approx. 250 yards). To advance in good order, this would have taken up to ten minutes. If the French had attacked during this period, it would have been disatrous for the English. Having gained information that the French intended to attack his archers with massed cavalry, Henry had ordered each archer to carve an eight foot long stake, pointed at each end. Upon reaching their position, the archers drove their stakes into the ground at such an angle as to impale a horse as it charged. These stakes would have been planted in a thicket in the archers positions; dangerous for a mounted rider to enter but offering enough space for a lightly armed archer to freely move. Within this thicket, the archers would have stood in a loose belt with their flanks resting against the woods.
At the order, the archers let loose the first arrow strike. The "air was darkened by an intolerable number of piercing arrows flying across the sky to pour upon the enemy like a cloud laden with rain." While this may not have caused too much damage, having been fired from extreme range, it must have produced a deafening thunderclap of noise as it hit the French lines. As an English archer could loose up to ten flights a minute, by the time the first landed another would have been in the air. In the confusion of what had just happened, amidst the noise of outraged Frenchmen, injured animals and soldiers, the French cavalry on the flanks charged forth, followed by the first line of dismounted men-at-arms.
If it is to retain any sort of order, a cavalry charge can move at only 12-15 miles an hour. It would have taken about 40 seconds to cover the distance to the English lines; enough time for three to four further volleys of arrows. During the morning wait, lax command had allowed many of the cavalry on the flanks to wander off out of position. Caught by surprise by the English assault, the charge was severely undermanned. Moreover, due to the woods on either side of the field, they were unable to outflank the archers necessitating a frontal assault. The few who did reach the lines of archers, perhaps not seeing the stakes in between the mass of archers, crashed straight into the thicket of spikes and were unable to breach the lines. As the survivors retreated in disarray, they were followed by further volleys of arrows. Horses crazed and uncontrollable by injury and fright, with no space to manouver, crashed directly into the advancing men-at-arms breaking their orderly advance.
To march the distance to the English lines would have taken three to four minutes giving some breathing space for the English. This was done over muddy ground further broken up by the mad cavalry charge. As the distance closed, the English archers were able to fire at right angles to their targets. Their arrows were fixed with the "Bodkin point", specially designed to penetrate armor. As the French advanced, they formed into three columns to attack the English men-at-arms. This was partially forced, partially planned. The French men-at-arms saw archers as inferior in social standing and, therefore, not worthy opponents whereas there was ransom to be gained by capturing an English noble. Furthermore, as the French advanced on the English position, the field narrowed by 150 yards compacting the French line. This was compounded by those on the flanks shying away from the hail of arrows pressing further inward. By the time they arrived at the English line, the French did not have enough room to fight freely.
Using lances cut down for fighting on foot, the attacking line would have rushed the last few meters to maximize the shock of impact to knock over the defenders, open gaps in the line, isolate individuals and push back the line in disorder. The English may have stepped back at the last moment to wrongfoot the French spearmen or if they had possessed greater numbers, they may have been able to rush forward themselves to steal the momentum. The French line attacked largely unsupported, in disorder and close to exhaustion from their trudge over broken ground. The French artillery, reduced to a position of impotence by a lack of a clear field of fire, and the archers and crossbowmen, outclassed by the faster, longer and more accurate rate of fire of the longbow, had been pushed out of position by the men-at-arms. When the French reached the English line, it had very little momentum left.
Still, as the two forces clashed, the English line buckled but soon rallied, neither side was willing to give way. The English not willing to leave their secure place for the open battlefield which would mean almost certain annihilation, and the French certain of victory and the force of numbers pushing from behind. With the press of numbers, the French were unable to attack or defend effectively meaning that the English would win in a one on one contest. As the attackers fell, they presented obstacles to those following. As the English pressed forth, cutting through the French attackers, a tumbling effect would have developed where the French were pushed forward from behind but also back by the English. As the shaken French line spilled out towards the archers, the archers downed their bows and grabbed their swords, axes and other weapons, including those dropped by the French, and fell on the flank. The heavily armed men-at-arms would not have been overwhelmed by this onslaught; it is much more likely that the archers in groups of two or three would have singled out those men-at-arms shaken by the initial charge. As one or two attacked the French man-at-arms, the third would maneuver behind to slash at unprotected parts such as behind the knee. Once down, the exhausted knight could be quickly dispatched with a blade through a joint in the armor or through the grills of the faceplate. This would have gradually repeated the tumbling effect on the flanks, lengthening the killing zone and enveloping the French. Many slightly injured, or knocked down were unable to rise through exhaustion, weight of their armor in the mud and were trampled underfoot by the press behind them.
The first French line was almost totally destroyed, either killed or taken prisoner. As the second line arrived on the scene, many quit the battlefield upon seeing the result of the first attack. Those who attacked met largely the same fate. The Duke of Barabant, arriving late to the battle due to a christening party the previous night led a brief charge which was quickly broken up and for which he lost his life.
Contemporary observers describe the piles of French bodies as "as high as a man", an exaggeration, but befitting what had happened. Within half an hour, the first two French lines were annihilated. Henry was careful not to let individuals sequester prisoners as the third French line remained on the field as a very real threat.
As prisoners were moved to the rear, in greater numbers than the whole English army, simultaneous reports came to Henry's attention. A mob of peasants with three knights under the command of the Lord of Agincourt attacked the baggage train to the rear. As the English could afford no more than a token guard, they were quickly overwhelmed and the attackers made off with their plunder, including one of Henry's crowns. This may, in fact, have been a poorly timed flanking attack, based on the French plan to cause disruption to the rear of the English position. As this occurred, the Counts of Marle and Fauquemberghes rallied 600 men-at-arms for a counter attack which ended as disastrously as the others. In response, to the ensuing panic, Henry ordered the killing of the prisoners. The English men-at-arms refused, probably not so much on moral grounds (killing an equal after their surrender was dishonorable) as financial. They stood to lose the ransom from the prisoners. As a result, 200 archers were given the job as they were tough, professional soldiers outside the bounds of chivalry.
There are many possible reasons for this order. It may simply have been revenge for the attack on the baggage train. It has also been suggested that it may have been used as a terror weapon to control the prisoners. As between one and two thousand prisoners were returned to England, those on the field would have greatly outnumbered the archers, at least 10-1 so it may have been an effective, even if brutal method of moving them quickly to the rear and knocking the last bit of fight out of them. More importantly, there were more prisoners than the English, all still in armor on a battlefield littered with weapons. With the third French line threatening to attack, Henry would have been worried about this threat from the rear. How many were killed is unknown but contemporary observers say it was more than were killed in battle. Modern scholars have roundly condemned Henry for this action but it is interesting to note that no observers of the day, even the French, have done so. In fact many argued it was justified and even went so far as to criticize the third French line for acting in a was as to force it. From the viewpoint of a 15th century knight, it was seen as necessary, the French also having done similar previously. The attack never materialized, and the killing of prisoners stopped as the threat evaporated. With the two first lines destroyed and the third slinking away, the battle of Agincourt was won.
-
the Battle of Iwo Jima
(note: young American boys not men in ages 18-21 raised the flag)
On 19 February 1945, the 5th Marine Amphibious Corps (consisting of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Marine Divisions) landed on Iwo Jima (Sulphur Island). When the battle was over, 6821 American Marines, Sailors, and Soldiers , along with an estimated 20,000+ Japanese defenders had died. This was Americas first landing on what was considered traditional Japanese territory. It was the beginning of the end.
-
Battle of Endor
The Battle of Endor was the final major engagement of the civil war fought by the Rebel Alliance and The Galactic Empire.
The situation of this battle was when the Alliance learned that Empire was constructing a second version of the Death Star. Knowing full well that this version would likely have corrected the original's design flaws that the Alliance exploited, it was decided that the station would have to be neutralized before it becomes operational.
With the sacrifice of the lives of many Bothan spies, the location of the base was found to be orbiting the forest moon of Endor. In addition, they learned that although the station was protected by a powerful deflector shield projected from a base on the moon, the station's weapons were not yet ready for service. Furthermore, they also learned that the Emperor himself would personally oversee the final completion of the station.
With a golden opportunity too good to miss, the Alliance planned a two pronged attack. A commando squad led by Han Solo, Princess Leia, Chewbacca and Luke Skywalker would land on the moon and disable the Imperial base's deflector shield projector which would allow a Rebel fleet to attack the station and destroy it.
Unknown to them, the Rebels were falling into a grand trap devised by The Emperor. Using simple disinformation, he hid the fact that the station's primary systems were already operational. With a large naval force hidden near the station and an elite legion of Imperial Stormtroopers standing by on the moon, he was ready to crush the Rebels once and for all.
The Rebels took the bait and the trap was sprung with the commandos captured at the moon's base and the Rebel fleet trapped by the Imperial naval force. To make things worse, the Death Star's superlaser proved to be an irresistible anti-ship weapon, destroying Rebel ships at will. General Lando Calrissian and Admiral Ackbar closed with the enemy fleet to buy time, but the situation was hopeless.
What turned the tide was that, unknown to the Emperor, the Rebel commandos had made an alliance with the indigenous Ewok tribe on the moon. The warriors attacked the Imperial Stormtroopers and soon defeated them with amazing ferocity and guile. The commandos then managed to gain access to the base and destroyed it which brought down the Death Star's deflector shield. A small squadron of fighters and the Millennium Falcon dove into the station's superstructure which to led them to the main reactor. They attacked it and caused it to start a massive explosion which destroyed the station.
Meanwhile, the Emperor, who was attempting to corrupt Luke Skywalker with the dark side of the Force, was killed by Darth Vader when he rebelled against him. With that death, it has been theorized that the subtle influence through the Force the Emperor exercised on his troops was removed and the Imperial Navy's fighting ability was greatly reduced, allowing the Rebel fleet to decimate and scatter them.
:D:D
-
You just cheapened every other battle mentioned in this thread. Kudos.
-
Thank you.
-
lol stick to Earth Battles ;)
-
Hmm.... I was always been impressed by the North African front during WW2. Not really a battle, though.
-
The Germans lost more after El Alamein then they did at Stalingrad, dont fall for the revisionist over glorification of the Russian front.
Also the Germans could not win the battle of britain or invade, they lacked sufficient surface assets ( http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/althist/seal1.htm ) or strategic bombers to defeat a northwood move by the RAF (which was the backup plan essentially).
-
Battle of Deneb
-
The Battle of Midway, the greatest Naval engagement in modern history. The tide of the Pacific theatre turned in this battle.
The Defense of Bastogne(sp?) by the 101st Airborne division against almost continuous German attacks and their subsequent rescue by 3rd Army under Patton.
-
Battle of Kar Dathra's Gate.
:ha: :ha:
and who are you calling revisionist? The Russian front inflicted way more casualties on the Germans than the Western Front. Next to Germany, Russia was the big bad bruiser of WW2.
-
Battle of Aljubarrota - A battle against the spanish anexation of Portugal in which the portuguese army managed to beat the oposing army which was 5 times larger due to the skills of Nuno Álvares Pereira. (1383)
-
Theres more to war then pure casualties, WW2 more than any was a war of economics, even the British outproduced Germany after 2 years of war.
Again im not saying that Stalingrad wasnt important but to call it THE turning point of WW2 when the Germans lost MORE at El Alamein (earlier in the war) and the standing army of their primary European ally is wrong.
-
Salamis.
Trafalgar.
Sea battles rock. ;)
-
Buffy vs The First (real ultimate evil).
-
Erm, no-one has mentioned the battle of Thermopylae yet? 300 Greeks against ~1 million persians.
-
Thunder Child takes on three Fighting Machines. Best battle EVAR
-
Battle of Bannockburn
Where a vastly outnumbered (by around 3 to 1), but better organized, Scottish army defeated the English outside Stirling castle.
Encounter of Bruce and De Bohun The main bulk of the English van had crossed the Bannock Burn and taken up position facing The Bruce's division. A young English Knight, one Henry De Bohun, spotted a lone figure riding back and forth along the Scots lines. Moving closer, he noticed that the man carried no crest upon his helmet, but a crown. Seeing that it was none other than King Robert himself, Bohun realised in his quest for glory, that he could end the battle in one go.
Moving from the English lines De Bohun, fully armoured and riding a heavy cavalry horse urged his beast to a gallop, and lowering his lance he aimed straight for the King. Robert, armed only with a battle axe and on a smaller horse, held his ground however until the last second. Just before De Bohun hit him, Robert quickly moved his horse aside and in one blow split open both the young knight's with his battle axe.
The Scots gave a sigh of relief, many shouting about how senseless Robert had been in endangering not only his own life but the future of their cause. The King however replied only with a complaint to the fact that he had broken the shaft of his favourite axe, which rather annoyed him.
http://home.gci.net/~airloom/bannockburn.htm
-
Oh yeah, and while we're at it, the Battle of Stalingrad.
Of course, the Russians could have won it with three times less casualties, hadn't there been a moron of a military commander, but hey, the did win it.
-
Battle of Midway.
No doubt about it. Had the americans lost the battle of midway, the Japanese had the oppurtunity and capability to go all the way to Hawaii. Imagine what a red island just off the coast of the US would have done to morale? I doubt enough funds would be available to fund the Manhattan project or end the war in there favour.
Otherwise, I'd say just about any other battle out there. D-Day, although important, was not too important. A loss there would have resulted in a second-order counterfractual, according to some historians.
-
Anything with Alexander the Great in it :yes:
-
Originally posted by karajorma
Anything with Alexander the Great in it :yes:
Agreed:)
-
Seelow, April 1945.
A prelude for invasion of Berlin, Germany's last true attempt to halt the Shi-- Russian advance. Do I need to tell more?
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
Oh yeah, and while we're at it, the Battle of Stalingrad.
Of course, the Russians could have won it with three times less casualties, hadn't there been a moron of a military commander, but hey, the did win it.
The fact that the nazi had tanks and planes, and the russians did not, might have helped the mount of causlties, too :p
-
Originally posted by Nico
The fact that the nazi had tanks and planes, and the russians did not, might have helped the mount of causlties, too :p
:wtf: :lol:
-
Originally posted by Nico
The fact that the nazi had tanks and planes, and the russians did not, might have helped the mount of causlties, too :p
Interestingly enough, at the beginning of the war, the russians had 12 times (12!) the tanks Germany had and 3 times as much planes.
Of course, for some reason they decided to build their airfields 50 km from the border, and order their troops not to retaliate against attacks. So most of their airfields were leveled in the first few days of the war
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
Interestingly enough, at the beginning of the war, the russians had 12 times (12!) the tanks Germany had and 3 times as much planes.
Of course, for some reason they decided to build their airfields 50 km from the border, and order their troops not to retaliate against attacks. So most of their airfields were leveled in the first few days of the war
IIRc by the time the tide turned (the retaking of Stalingrad), the russians were producing 4 times the number of tanks (etc) the Nazis were, too.
-
They were, which again shows, that if the leader of the military had been someone competent, aside from Marshal Zhukov and co. the war would have been won a lot faster, with a lot less casualties.
Whether that would have been a good thing or not, is another matter entirely.
-
Most military historians say that Zhukov was extremely competent. And they know what they're talking about.
Originally posted by Mr Carrot
The Germans lost more after El Alamein then they did at Stalingrad, dont fall for the revisionist over glorification of the Russian front.
wtf? German lost 250-300 thousand at Stalingrad, thats roughly the same as the total amount of germans in north afrika 41-43. I think somebodys doing a bit of revision of their own.
-
Originally posted by aldo_14
IIRc by the time the tide turned (the retaking of Stalingrad), the russians were producing 4 times the number of tanks (etc) the Nazis were, too.
I know that, but I'm talking about Stalingrad. There was no russian tanks not planes during the ( long ) battle of Stalingrad.
There was also the fact that the soldiers who would retreat were killed by russian militaries waiting behind them.
The soldiers were not allowed to retreat, if they did, they died. No martial court, nothing, there were bateries of machinguns waiting not for the nazis but for them.
That sucks, heh?
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
Erm, no-one has mentioned the battle of Thermopylae yet? 300 Greeks against ~1 million persians.
Originally posted by Rictor
The battle of Thermopolae (sp?), in which 300 Spartans defended a mountain pass against the the entire Persian army. They were defeated in the end, but the time they bought allowed the Greek city states to marshall their defences and drive back the Persians.
-
[color=66ff00]Freespace; one guy saves the universe.
[/color]
-
"Looking at FS1"
"Looking at FS2"
Actually, what is Alpha one really saving, apart from a handful of ships? :p
He isn't even the one who destroys the Lucifer :p
-
Little more complex than what you see in Enemy at the Gates Nico :p There were Russian tanks in Stalingrad and the Russian 8th army did fly missions around the city. Difficulty in getting tanks across the volga as well as Stavka holding replacements back for the encirclement operation made them scarce though, and the Soviet air force suffered heavy losses due to inexperienced crews and inferior aircraft. As for the gunning retreaters down, did happen but for the most part russians didnt actually retreat.
-
He isn't even the one who destroys the Lucifer
:wtf:
-
Methinks someone missed the point of arming yourself with Harbingers in the final mission.
-
Originally posted by Nico
He isn't even the one who destroys the Lucifer :p
Speak for yourself. I was the one who fired the death blow :D
-
I blew up the Sathanas myself. It's amazing what a bug could do for you where the Colossus doesn't fire and you get to fire helios for a long time at the Sathanas.
-
For those interested in the Battle of Stalingrad, I suggest reading: "Stalingrad - The Fateful Siege: 1942-1943", by Antony Beevor.
And yes, Stalingrad would certainly rank amongst the greatest battles in recorded history. I would also add the Battle of Kursk (July 1943) to the list.
-
Midway (WW2)
Leyte Gulf (WW2)
Battle of Bulge (WW2)
Gettysburg (Civil war)
Saratoga (Amer. Rev.)
Waterloo (Napoleanic Wars)
New Orleans (War of 1812)
-
LOL Some of these take me back to the days of reading Warhammer Battle Reports in White Dwarf :D
I'm more a tactics than a Blood and Thunder person....
The Charge of the Heavy Brigade - NOT Light, the Heavy brigade charged, uphill, against 3 times their number of Enemy cavalry that had taken them completely by surprise, and routed them. In fact, had the general of the Infantry not been throwing a tantrum, the damage that could have been done that day was phenomenal.
Hastings - A perfect example of how tactics can win or lose a battle, had the defenders remained where they were and not impetuously followed the fleeing attackers, the day would have ended entirely differently.
Waterloo - An excellent example of tactics, and good strategic decisions by the men in field.
-
Battle of Medina Ridge. This one single battle that wiped nearly the entire Republican Guard Armor was more than enough to baptize the M1, and was an incredibly impressive show of high-technology by the US.
-
Originally posted by Flipside
Hastings - A perfect example of how tactics can win or lose a battle, had the defenders remained where they were and not impetuously followed the fleeing attackers, the day would have ended entirely differently.
I prefer the Battle of Stamford Bridge personally. 300 viking ships came over. 24 left.
Harold's forced march up there and then back down to fight at Hastings is the stuff of legends :) And as you say they almost won it.
-
Cannae, Carrhae, Teutonburger Wald - the three biggest defeats of the Roman Empire.
-
Originally posted by Rictor
stuff about thermopylae
I stand corrected.
Also, for interesting insights, on Russian tactics (or the lack thereof), Suvorov's The Shadow of Victory
-
Originally posted by nuclear1
Battle of Medina Ridge. This one single battle that wiped nearly the entire Republican Guard Armor was more than enough to baptize the M1, and was an incredibly impressive show of high-technology by the US.
I'm not sure you can count any battle where a clearly superior side wins as 'great'. Given that the lethal range of the M1 gun is higher than the Iraqi T-72's, and the M1 has thermal imagin site, it was basically a turkey shoot.
Had the Iraqis won, it would have been a great battle (winning vs a vastly superior foe) - i think the criteria is military genius & heroism here, not overwhelming numerical or technological superiority.
just a thought........
-
What about the Battles of Solomon and A Boa Qu? >>;;;;
-
LOL
Does the Spanish Armada vs The British Weather count as a battle?
-
Thermopylae was a great battle. That thing that's sad, is the only reason they lost was because traitors showed them the way around behind the Spartans. If they hadn't of happened, who knows how long those Spartans would have held up.
-
Originally posted by an0n
Methinks someone missed the point of arming yourself with Harbingers in the final mission.
Methinks someone missed the fun of just shooting down fighters instead of waiting stupidly for a bomb to lock. I did shoot a single time at the Luci, and it went down nice and easy w/o me having to do something has boring as bombing. I hate bombing, so I loved that last mission :p
-
Originally posted by Stunaep
Also, for interesting insights, on Russian tactics (or the lack thereof), Suvorov's The Shadow of Victory
Viktor Suvorov aka Vladimir Rezun who also claims that Russia was about to invade Europe when German invaded :doubt:
-
Oooh yes, Kursk would have to be one of my favourite land battles. Roll on the tanks. :)
-
The Germans+Ities lost 160600 in the retreat from Africa (as a result of El Alamein) + more equipment (especially planes) was lost/captured.
they lost 147.000 at stalingrad and (more importantly) the battles around and directly after it.
the difference is that the german loss was not instantly recognisable for several months due to the long retreat through Tunisia. The encirclement circumstances at Stalingrad allowed the defeat to be instantly apparent.
-
EH wrong. The Germans did lose that many but thats over the course of a whole theatre, including the Torch landings in Morroco. El Alamain was the turning point in North Africa but it was just one battle. The total Axis strength at El Alamain was just over 100k, this was less the amount the Russians took prisioner at Stalingrad.
Sixt army ration figures give a total of 275,000 men trapped in the encirclement at Stalingrad. None of these escaped. If you were to include the losses inflicted on the Romanians and Italians, as well as those suffered during 4th panzers attempt to relieve the kessel, you're looking at a total of near half a million.
El Alamain was a great victory for the allies, and it was Britains turning point in the war, but it wasnt Germanys.
-
some of the greatest battles ever fought were the ones between carthage and rome.
after hannibal crossed into Italy, he only had about 26000 troops with him. While he was there, he engaged massive roman armies numerous times.
In his first major battle in italy, hannibal defeated the *entire* roman army (sympronius lost 26000 men)
at that time, he could have marched southeast and taken rome without a fight, but her turned south.
anythor major battle, romans had another 30000 odd army (im doing this by memory please check these numbers out)
hannibal killed 16000 of them and took 15000 prsioner.
in another battle, the romans had a 80000 man army, and massed it all near the town of Cani. Hanibals 26000 men army killed 50000 romans.
Hannibal was undefeated in Italy. He had 3 chances to march into rome when rome had no defence. If he had, and carthage had won, western civilization as we know it wouldn not exist.
-
Battle of Manzikert, August 19 1071
One of the greatest disasters to befall the Byzantine army. The Seljuk turks had been threatening the eastern borders of the Byzantine empire for some years, without posing any significant threat, but in 1071 their leader, Alp Arslan, gathered a huge force, perhaps even as large as 100,000 men, and invaded the eastern empire.
The Byzantine Emperor, Romanus Diogenes, had gained the throne through marriage, and ruled as joint emperor with his step-son. He had only been on the throne since 1068, and was not yet firmly established. The Turks had crossed the border, and taken the fortresses of Akhlat and Manzikert (now in modern Turkey). Romanus Diogenes gathered a huge army, although he was still outnumbered by the Turks, and advanced to the border, where he recaptured Akhlat and was besieging Manzikert when the Turks arrived. The Byzantine army formed up, and advanced towards the Turks, who refused to stand and fight, instead using the mobility of their horse-archers to harry the advancing Byzantines. Eventually, after several hours, Romanus Diogenes ordered the withdrawal, intending to return to his camp for the night. The withdrawal was not as smooth as the advance, and some gaps opened in the line. The Turks harried the retreating columns, until the Emperor gave the order to turn and fight.
At this point treachery played a part in the disaster. The rearguard, commanded by Andronicus Ducas, an enemy of Romanus Diogenes, simply continued back to the camp, ignoring the order to turn, and leaving the main army to its fate. Once the rearguard was gone, the Turks were able to outflank the Byzantines, and eventually surround them. To make things worse, one flank of the Byzantine army was sufficiently detached from the main force for it to be forced to fight separately. The Byzantines held out until dark, but eventually they were overwhelmed. The Emperor himself was captured, and the bulk of the army destroyed.