Winged Hussars vs Mongolian cavalry?

[Kommandir]

Who is the deadliest cavalry in the history?

[CHE]

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Who is the deadliest cavalry in the history?

Mongolian cavalry. They were able to shoot many arrows into other cavalry at a distance.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by CHE:

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Who is the deadliest cavalry in the history?

Mongolian cavalry. They were able to shoot many arrows into other cavalry at a distance.

Hah but Hussars plate armor was so good that even bullets bounced off

[CHE]

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Originally posted by CHE:

Mongolian cavalry. They were able to shoot many arrows into other cavalry at a distance.

Hah but Hussars plate armor was so good that even bullets bounced off

Their horses were completely covered in plate armour? If so, then they would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certianly couldn't catch the Mongols. If not completely covered in plate armour, then the Mongols would have won.

The fact is, the Mongols defeated the Polish in battle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica

The Hussars didn't even seem to have armour on their horses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_hussars

Thus the Mongols would have killed their horses with arrows, causing mass injurises and death to riders from horses being killed while galloping.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by CHE:

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Hah but Hussars plate armor was so good that even bullets bounced off

Their horses were completely covered in plate armour? If so, then they would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certianly couldn't catch the Mongols. If not completely covered in plate armour, then the Mongols would have won.

The fact is, the Mongols defeated the Polish in battle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica

The Hussars didn't even seem to have armour on their horses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_hussars

Thus the Mongols would have killed their horses with arrows, causing mass injurises and death to riders from horses being killed while galloping.

Yes their horses were covered in armor (only if they wanted them to be). And its not certain that the Hussars wouldnt be able to catch Mongols.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by CHE:

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Hah but Hussars plate armor was so good that even bullets bounced off

Their horses were completely covered in plate armour? If so, then they would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certianly couldn't catch the Mongols. If not completely covered in plate armour, then the Mongols would have won.

The fact is, the Mongols defeated the Polish in battle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica

The Hussars didn't even seem to have armour on their horses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_hussars

Thus the Mongols would have killed their horses with arrows, causing mass injurises and death to riders from horses being killed while galloping.

Plus the Mongolians conquered Poland BEFORE the Hussars were formed. Correct me if im wrong

[CHE]

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Originally posted by CHE:

Their horses were completely covered in plate armour? If so, then they would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certianly couldn't catch the Mongols. If not completely covered in plate armour, then the Mongols would have won.

The fact is, the Mongols defeated the Polish in battle.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Legnica

The Hussars didn't even seem to have armour on their horses:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_hussars

Thus the Mongols would have killed their horses with arrows, causing mass injurises and death to riders from horses being killed while galloping.

Yes their horses were covered in armor (only if they wanted them to be). And its not certain that the Hussars wouldnt be able to catch Mongols.

Those Polish winged hussars whose horses were completely covered in plate armour would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certainly couldn't catch the Mongols.

Those Polish winged hussars not completely covered in plate armour, would have been wiped out by Mongol arrows.

The less armoured Mongols were able to move faster than cavalry which had more armour.

I suggest you learn about the Mongols and how they conquered such a huge area. Bye.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by CHE:

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Yes their horses were covered in armor (only if they wanted them to be). And its not certain that the Hussars wouldnt be able to catch Mongols.

Those Polish winged hussars whose horses were completely covered in plate armour would not have been able to move very far before getting tired. They certainly couldn't catch the Mongols.

Those Polish winged hussars not completely covered in plate armour, would have been wiped out by Mongol arrows.

The less armoured Mongols were able to move faster than cavalry which had more armour.

I suggest you learn about the Mongols and how they conquered such a huge area. Bye.

The Hussar's European horses are strong enough to be covered in armor and catch up with Mogolians at the same time. They were undefeated, just like Mongolians, in fact, the Hussars lasted longer (not too sure about that). The key of the Mongolian's success was their tactics and the stupidity of the East Europeans at that time.
Perhaps you should learn more about the legendary Winged Hussars.





P/S: Hussars wouldnt be idiotic enough to chase Mongolians tho...

[Storm]

Nothing beats the Winged Hussars!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75zmIj_4LFQ

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by Kayto Shields:

Nothing beats the Winged Hussars!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75zmIj_4LFQ

And then the Winged Hussars arrived.

[Inardesco]

You do realise that the Winged Hussars are a unit from the Musket era and that the Mongols were far earlier in history?

[Warlord of the Lowlands]

You can't really compare the 2 because there in a different time period, but the polish hussars have never lost a battle and won a lot of them even when outnumbered.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

You do realise that the Winged Hussars are a unit from the Musket era and that the Mongols were far earlier in history?

Yes. Yes i do. Still starting this discussion isnt illegal right? I mean the Mongolians were ahead of their time

[Inardesco]

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Originally posted by Inardesco:

You do realise that the Winged Hussars are a unit from the Musket era and that the Mongols were far earlier in history?

Yes. Yes i do. Still starting this discussion isnt illegal right? I mean the Mongolians were ahead of their time

Discussions are just that, discussions. Just like the question of who would win between a pirate and a ninja or the Samurai vs Romans they fall short of 1 simple thing;

They didn't fight each other, which means that their equipment and art of war was focussed on fighting enemies to which they had adapted to. If armour didn't became tough in the 15th century Europe, pole-axes and the like wouldn't have been invented. If gunpowder wouldn't become so prominent, armour wouldn't have been removed from infantry units later on in the time-period.

Sure, you can look at 2 generals and how they fought their battles and what equipment their troops used, but that's nothing. They didn't fight each other thus weren't using the tactics and equipment required to fight each other.

Winged Hussars needed the armour protection in order to complete their charge, the wings were there to inspire fear into the enemy and the Mongols used a vast array of horses and tactics akin to charging nimble horse archers, then feigning a retreat to lure the enemy into a trap where they'd be out of position and easily butchered.

These are 2 vastly different tactics for their cavalry since again, the main Mongol forces were horseback whereas the Winged Hussars were a supporting force to the main infantry lines.

[Kommandir]

Originally posted by Inardesco:

Originally posted by Kommando HORRORZ:

Yes. Yes i do. Still starting this discussion isnt illegal right? I mean the Mongolians were ahead of their time

Discussions are just that, discussions. Just like the question of who would win between a pirate and a ninja or the Samurai vs Romans they fall short of 1 simple thing;

They didn't fight each other, which means that their equipment and art of war was focussed on fighting enemies to which they had adapted to. If armour didn't became tough in the 15th century Europe, pole-axes and the like wouldn't have been invented. If gunpowder wouldn't become so prominent, armour wouldn't have been removed from infantry units later on in the time-period.

Sure, you can look at 2 generals and how they fought their battles and what equipment their troops used, but that's nothing. They didn't fight each other thus weren't using the tactics and equipment required to fight each other.

Winged Hussars needed the armour protection in order to complete their charge, the wings were there to inspire fear into the enemy and the Mongols used a vast array of horses and tactics akin to charging nimble horse archers, then feigning a retreat to lure the enemy into a trap where they'd be out of position and easily butchered.

These are 2 vastly different tactics for their cavalry since again, the main Mongol forces were horseback whereas the Winged Hussars were a supporting force to the main infantry lines.

Also the Hussars were a light cavalry unit trained to fight horse archers like the Mongols. Its a shame that the stupid Europeans werent prepared for what was coming

[Inardesco]

The hussars from what period? During the reign of the Winged Hussars (18th century) there were no armies left that still used horse archers.