|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 5, 2019 20:46:33 GMT
I came across this randomly on YT and thought it may be of interest.
Ranked by battles won:
|
|
|
|
Post by Iosef Stalin on May 6, 2019 0:40:38 GMT
How am I not on that!? Iosef Stalin was the best of all of them. He dominated every single foe. He won 57 battles and lost 1000. Thats a net gain of -943!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lillis "Bing" Crosby Jr on May 14, 2019 15:11:14 GMT
I came across this randomly on YT and thought it may be of interest. Ranked by battles won: glad to see Napolean as the first, read the comments section though that criticised the reliability of this video since it was based on wikipedia, and some netizens even corrected some facts about the accurate victories won. Would be great if there was a video based on research from various scholarly sources to rank, though it may take very long and be only by dedicated documentaries or very passionate researchers |
|
|
|
Post by Tito on May 14, 2019 18:31:56 GMT
I think that Generals or Military Leaders ranks shouldnt be ranked on the ammount of battles won or on their ratio to battles won to lost, as their strategy is what matters more, not how many battles they win, if you use a proper strat you only need one battle to fight and win :^)
|
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 15, 2019 4:26:21 GMT
I think it is almost impossible to judge who the best general is because the difference in men makes a difference. furthermore, the difference in technology would also be important because winning people with bows is simply easier. the difference in terrain can also be decisive. someone on a mountain will be far in favor. imo the list sounds pretty logical. the complaining in the comments is mainly about people who don't have their favorite among them. Only maurits realy came as a surprise to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 15, 2019 12:46:28 GMT
I think it is almost impossible to judge who the best general is because the difference in men makes a difference. furthermore, the difference in technology would also be important because winning people with bows is simply easier. the difference in terrain can also be decisive. someone on a mountain will be far in favor. imo the list sounds pretty logical. the complaining in the comments is mainly about people who don't have their favorite among them. Only maurits realy came as a surprise to me. That's true, one reason I was so successful was because where possible I always chose where to engage the enemy. I think if we're all honest here, as second on this list and the man who finally defeated the man at the top of it (along with a few of the others on there) in reality the title of Greatest General in History belongs to me  |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 15, 2019 14:06:49 GMT
I think it is almost impossible to judge who the best general is because the difference in men makes a difference. furthermore, the difference in technology would also be important because winning people with bows is simply easier. the difference in terrain can also be decisive. someone on a mountain will be far in favor. imo the list sounds pretty logical. the complaining in the comments is mainly about people who don't have their favorite among them. Only maurits realy came as a surprise to me. That's true, one reason I was so successful was because where possible I always chose where to engage the enemy. I think if we're all honest here, as second on this list and the man who finally defeated the man at the top of it (along with a few of the others on there) in reality the title of Greatest General in History belongs to me the number was in your favor, but of course you could have done it with only 50,000  |
|
|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 16, 2019 12:30:06 GMT
That's true, one reason I was so successful was because where possible I always chose where to engage the enemy. I think if we're all honest here, as second on this list and the man who finally defeated the man at the top of it (along with a few of the others on there) in reality the title of Greatest General in History belongs to me the number was in your favor, but of course you could have done it with only 50,000 Well sure, I could have... But my greatness ensured I had superior numbers on this occasion |
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lillis "Bing" Crosby Jr on May 16, 2019 12:31:45 GMT
Well sure, I could have... But my greatness ensured I had superior numbers on this occasion and Lady Luck on your side as well ^-^ |
|
|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 16, 2019 12:46:19 GMT
Well sure, I could have... But my greatness ensured I had superior numbers on this occasion and Lady Luck on your side as well ^-^ As my great adversary famously said "I would rather have a general who was lucky than one who was good" Fortunately for me (and the rest of Europe), I'm both |
|
|
|
Post by Harry Lillis "Bing" Crosby Jr on May 16, 2019 12:49:20 GMT
HAHAHA nice flex, you were destined to become one of Europe's, if not the world's greatest generals of all time
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 16, 2019 12:50:18 GMT
As my great adversary famously said "I would rather have a general who was lucky than one who was good" Fortunately for me (and the rest of Europe), I'm both Yeah, we all know you Islanders have something against United Europe |
|
|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 16, 2019 12:56:31 GMT
As my great adversary famously said "I would rather have a general who was lucky than one who was good" Fortunately for me (and the rest of Europe), I'm both Yeah, we all know you Islanders have something against United Europe Only if we're not in charge  |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 16, 2019 13:03:53 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tito on May 16, 2019 18:24:21 GMT
I have watched that video before this and I hoped I was going to be there. Big dissapoint : (((
|
|
