Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The greatest battle in history?
JTR~~    3/29/2010 8:33:34 AM
What do people thin the greatest/most importanat battle in all of history is (not a conflict eg. WW2). please include facts in your opinion. cheers
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2
smitty237       4/1/2010 3:15:00 PM
The reason you're not getting any responses to this thread is that it is so subjective and will accomplish nothing other than starting nationalistic fights.  The Brits might say the Battle of Hastings while the Russians will say the Battle of Staligrad.  If you go deep into history you might claim the Battle of Zama or even the Battle of Thermopylae, but when you start battle like Qadesh people's eyes start glazing over.  Maybe you would get more response if YOU declared what battle you think is the greatest in history and then invite people to agree or disagree. 
 
Quote    Reply

smitty237       4/1/2010 3:16:53 PM

The reason you're not getting any responses to this thread is that it is so subjective and will accomplish nothing other than starting nationalistic fights.  The Brits might say the Battle of Hastings while the Russians will say the Battle of Staligrad.  If you go deep into history you might claim the Battle of Zama or even the Battle of Thermopylae, but when you start battle like Qadesh people's eyes start glazing over.  Maybe you would get more response if YOU declared what battle you think is the greatest in history and then invite people to agree or disagree. 

Ugh.  Damn SP for its lack of an edit function.  The line should read "...but when you start discussing a battle like Qadesh..."
 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    true, but i wasnt looking to start a disspute   4/3/2010 2:17:12 PM

i thought that me holding my comments back at first i wouldn?t spark some form of argument instead of a debate so here i go,personally i feel the greatest battle in history purely down to historical significance and the implications it had was the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, as without it Europe may have turned out very differently, the world wars may have never taken place, France would dominate Europe etc, perhaps it would have been better if the world wars hadn?t taken place, but the fact is they did, and they did so because of Waterloo, it also lead to the creation of modern day Belgium (good country) hence the many important political events that have taken place because of the famous battle, there were also many great acts of heroism on both sides, and it was the first great showdown between Napoleon (arguably the greatest military mind in history) and The Duke of Wellington Arthur Wellesley

Thanks

 

 
Quote    Reply

Nocturne       4/4/2010 5:45:42 PM
hmm probably i would put this question ' which battles changed the flow of history in the greatest way'. While Staliningrad was the battle of epic proportions. i don't really think that victory in Staliningrad would have won Germans the victory in Russia. If not Stalingrad the same would have been repeated in Moscow or Leningrad~. Germans would have grinded themselves to bits anyway
Battle of Waterloo epic battle too. But really what would have changed if Napaleon had won the day? Not much i guess.

At least for Europe i would put Battle of Vienna 1683. We might have had very different world if Ottomans had won.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/4/2010 8:49:03 PM

hmm probably i would put this question ' which battles changed the flow of history in the greatest way'. While Staliningrad was the battle of epic proportions. i don't really think that victory in Staliningrad would have won Germans the victory in Russia. If not Stalingrad the same would have been repeated in Moscow or Leningrad~. Germans would have grinded themselves to bits anyway

Battle of Waterloo epic battle too. But really what would have changed if Napaleon had won the day? Not much i guess.




At least for Europe i would put Battle of Vienna 1683. We might have had very different world if Ottomans had won.

Salamis
 
Lepanto
 
Battle of the Capes
 
Midway.
 
You have to look for those battles that have to be won or else history pivots abruptly and lurches off in a new direction.

Borodino
 
Acre 
 
Hastings
 
Saratoga 

Pueblo (in the Mexican American War)
 
Things could have been far different if the attacker lost.
 
There are many such little and large battles. To ask the question, which was the greatest? Who is to say?\
 
 Establish parameters and then you can set up set limiters.
 
H.

 
 
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko       4/5/2010 6:24:23 AM
There's no way one can find the most influential battle. What's also to consider is the importance and duration of the influence.. the amount of people the influece has touched and in how deep ways. I also state that different ethnicities are valued differently concerning influence. No way to tell.
 
1) Bloodiest (as the greatest) battle however is far more simple to tell.  Count casualties, and you'll find the sum of stupidity of war in general concerning a particular battle.
 
2) Also quite within possibilities is to calculate the most costly battle; the battle that cased most material destruction and waste. Most destroyed infrastructure, ordnance and equipment translated in currency as related to the current living standards.
 
3) & 4) And to both you could apply relative bloodiness and relative costliness; how much absolute waste of life and money per time unit.
 
5) The absolutely most intense battle would be the one that consumed the greatest deal of resources assigned to it; "... and they perished to the last man. It was quite intense, would you not agree my dear chap?"
 
6) The relatively most intense battle would be calculating absolute intensity within a time unit. "...and 85% of that division was dead, wounded or missing after five hours of fighting."
 
THEN make a weighed average of above mentioned  1 - 6. Weighing must downplay absolute number of casualties and currency to give room for intensity too, but not too much since no-one is interested in skirmishes, no matter how intense. You'll receive an Objective Greatness Index, or OGI as we call it at Global Pseudoscience Systems.
----
 
Then take in subjective historical relevance (SHR), a multiplier for OGI. SHR is calculated as follows:
 
Base multiplier is 1 (one) 
 
- if battle took place in 20th Century, then x 2
- if battle took place in 19th Century, then x 1,4
- if either or both parties in combat have later been explained either as Good or Evil,  then x 5
- if people remember names of individuals from the battle, then x 2
- if the battle has a memorable name, then x 1,3
- if there was some excessive brutality within the battle, then x 1,5
- if there was disparity in quality of used technology between parties, then x 1,5
- if the battle introduced a Rock-Star of Weapons, then x 2 (...and for the first time the Maxim mowed down...)
- if there was a decisive outcome, then x 2
- Special Nazi Bonus for the week is x 1,3
 
- if both sides not of west European origin (genealogy), then x 0,3
- if battle took place between the best days of Roman Empire and the Industrial age, then x 0,3
- if the name of the battle is inpronouncible to a westerner, then x 0,5
- if both sides lacked memorable uniforms, symbols, ideologies and names, then x 0,3
- if outcome was a draw, then x 0,5
 
----
As a result of OGI x SHR, you'll get the Greatness Index, or GI
---

And when measured with GI, the greates battle of all times is...
 
*drums*
 
Battle of Stalingrad http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emgift.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />. 
 
You're Welcome.
 
M
 
Quote    Reply

myhandlewontfi    just couldnt resist it   4/5/2010 10:10:33 AM
The greatest battle of all history:
 
You have to think about chaostheory: A butterfly flapping its wings in Moscow can lead to a rainstorm in Brazil, which then should be able to lead to more butterflies being born in Texas, which leads to still more rainstorms.
 
Hence in my humble opinion the further back in history you go the more the even uninteresting battles will influence. an example is probably needed:
 
If the Persians had won the battle of Salamis there would have been no democracy to inspire Rome's republik, hence Rome would probably not have emerged as we know it, even if it had it would have been a very different Rome, Hence it would have been up to the persians or a very different kind of Rome to civilise Western Europe, If that had been so the Vikings or Rus may not have sailed up the rivers of Russia(It probably would not have been called Russia either) to help found Russia, Leaving the Slavs to do so alone. While the slavs could probably have done so Russia or more likely Slavland would look very different. There would have been no French revolution as we know it, hence most likely no Napoleon either, without Napoleon, no first and second world wars, if Hitler did go into politics he would have done so in a very different country, and probably speaking his speaches in some kind of persian dialect, but there would have been no weimar republic for him to overthrow. If Stalin Had become leader of slavland he would likely not have been invaded by Germany and hence there could never have been a battle of Stalingrad if the battle of Salamis had not been fought and won by the greeks.
 
Aint this fun :P
 
Quote    Reply

myhandlewontfi    just couldnt resist it 2   4/5/2010 10:25:56 AM
So you see the further back in history you go the more influential the battles usually are according to me.
 
The worlds most influential battle to the religious people would thence be Kain vs Abel. :P
 
The worlds most influential battle to the non religous people would be when sixteen mokeys banded together and killed the last female dinosaur making the dinosaurs extinct. :P
 
The battle which has influenced the fewest people yet is some battle in Afghanistan which some journalist is writing about as i type this, but which may be enourmously important in 500 years,if only becuase private seymour was killed whose great great great great grandson was supposed to invent anti gravity . ;P
 
Not that I am in any way saying what is happening in Afghanistan is unimportant (Thanks America).
 
I hope you can understand what i am trying to say comments welcome.
 
And please dont get insulted, over either my logic or my typos I am only having fun but i just couldnt rests it :P
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar       4/5/2010 10:27:35 AM

There's no way one can find the most influential battle. What's also to consider is the importance and duration of the influence.. the amount of people the influece has touched and in how deep ways. I also state that different ethnicities are valued differently concerning influence. No way to tell.

 

1) Bloodiest (as the greatest) battle however is far more simple to tell.  Count casualties, and you'll find the sum of stupidity of war in general concerning a particular battle.

For utter useless waste of life to no purpose by both sides. Check.
 
2) Also quite within possibilities is to calculate the most costly battle; the battle that cased most material destruction and waste. Most destroyed infrastructure, ordnance and equipment translated in currency as related to the current living standards.

For utter useless waste of wealth to no purpose by both sides. Check.

3) & 4) And to both you could apply relative bloodiness and relative costliness; how much absolute waste of life and money per time unit.

For utter useless waste of life divided by wealth wasted to no purpose by both sides. Check.
 
5) The absolutely most intense battle would be the one that consumed the greatest deal of resources assigned to it; "... and they perished to the last man. It was quite intense, would you not agree my dear chap?"

For mono-maniacal dixation on a stupid useless objective by both sides to no purpose at all.  Check.
 
6) The relatively most intense battle would be calculating absolute intensity within a time unit. "...and 85% of that division was dead, wounded or missing after five hours of fighting."

For utter incompetent use of last man stands, banzai charges, Human wave infantry assaults, etc. Check.
 
THEN make a weighed average of above mentioned  1 - 6. Weighing must downplay absolute number of casualties and currency to give room for intensity too, but not too much since no-one is interested in skirmishes, no matter how intense. You'll receive an Objective Greatness Index, or OGI as we call it at Global Pseudoscience Systems.

I'll accept that.
 
----

 
Then take in subjective historical relevance (SHR), a multiplier for OGI. SHR is calculated as follows:

Subjective Historical Idiot Theorem Happens. Check.
 

Base multiplier is 1 (one) 

Okay. I.Q."s of principle participant leaders and instigators. Check!
 
- if battle took place in 20th Century, then x 2

Time range. Check!
 
- if battle took place in 19th Century, then x 1,4

Accept variant tactical incompetence modifier (French, Germans, Russians) in place? Check!   
 
- if either or both parties in combat have later been explained either as Good or Evil,  then x 5

Accept substitute variable of ethical status of both leaderships; as criminally stupid, insane, or morally evil with no discernible actual difference at the time, in correct post hoc analysis? Check.  

- if people remember names of individuals from the battle, then x 2
 
Check!
 
- if the battle has a memorable name, then x 1,3

Check!
 
- if there was some excessive brutality within the battle, then x 1,5
 
Quote    Reply

Mikko       4/5/2010 11:02:50 AM


Battle of Stalingrad http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emgift.gif" alt="" align="absmiddle" border="0" />. 

You're Welcome.

Verdun. http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emkulou.gif" alt="" align="absmiddle" border="0" />

M
 Well defined, sir!

H.

Thanks!
 
True. First World War does have several decent meat grinders to consider. They do get additional bonuses from a) flamethrowers, b) gas attacks, c) brutal hand-to-hand in trenches and d) pools of mud that could drown masses of troops. I am yet to decide which would be the saddest place to be in but I'll take your word for Verdun.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics