Roman Empire vs 2 continents of Dinosaurs

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-09 11:16pm

Darth_Shinji wrote:
verilon wrote:
Umm.....I think we're ignoring the fact that there are other people....as in all these vs. combats, homeland defense doesn't really matter.
The whole point of this thread is if Rome could succed in this campaign the realistic limatations are very much apart of this.... and even if it wasn't, even if they could send all of thier miliatry over.... manpower and logistics would still be horrendous in the long run.

Ugh,. You missed the point. ASSUME that homeland defense is not a factor. Realistically, they are sending their troops to go kill the dinos....I assume they'll be in Europe and North Africa, thus eliminating the need for homeland security, as Europe would include many of their natural opponents, as would Africa.

BlkbrryTheGreat · Post by **BlkbrryTheGreat** » 2002-11-09 11:26pm

Ok, this is the stupidist thread ive seen in quite awhile, but to answer your question the Romans would stop trying to kill the dinos long before they even cleared out 1/100th of one of the continents. If you want to know why just consider how long this mad Emperor would live, and compare it to the sheer square mileage in N. or S. America.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-09 11:35pm

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Ok, this is the stupidist thread ive seen in quite awhile, but to answer your question the Romans would stop trying to kill the dinos long before they even cleared out 1/100th of one of the continents. If you want to know why just consider how long this mad Emperor would live, and compare it to the sheer square mileage in N. or S. America.

Did we ever specify which continents? Eusope and Africa would be best bets.

Darth_Shinji · Post by **Darth_Shinji** » 2002-11-09 11:39pm

verilon wrote:
Ugh,. You missed the point. ASSUME that homeland defense is not a factor. Realistically, they are sending their troops to go kill the dinos....I assume they'll be in Europe and North Africa, thus eliminating the need for homeland security, as Europe would include many of their natural opponents, as would Africa.

And I've already said they could have no homeland defence..... but I'm not going to continue to change the debate to be more and more in the romans favor... considering that Rathark asked if the romans could win against the dino's in his scenio. And even europe and afica would still have the same problems.... less of a problem, but there is no avoiding it.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-09 11:41pm

Darth_Shinji wrote:
verilon wrote:
Ugh,. You missed the point. ASSUME that homeland defense is not a factor. Realistically, they are sending their troops to go kill the dinos....I assume they'll be in Europe and North Africa, thus eliminating the need for homeland security, as Europe would include many of their natural opponents, as would Africa.
And I've already said they could have no homeland defence..... but I'm not going to continue to change the debate to be more and more in the romans favor... considering that Rathark asked if the romans could win against the dino's in his scenio. And even europe and afica would still have the same problems.... less of a problem, but there is no avoiding it.

True, however, the poison as outlined above would kill off far more than 1/100 of a continent.

Darth_Shinji · Post by **Darth_Shinji** » 2002-11-09 11:48pm

verilon wrote:
Did we ever specify which continents? Eusope and Africa would be best bets.

Nope, he specified N. and S. America.

Darth_Shinji · Post by **Darth_Shinji** » 2002-11-09 11:51pm

verilon wrote:
Darth_Shinji wrote:
True, however, the poison as outlined above would kill off far more than 1/100 of a continent.

How much of this poison does take to kill an elephant? I doubt this poison could kill a bronto or an ultrasaurs in time to save an army.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-09 11:53pm

Darth_Shinji wrote:
verilon wrote:
Did we ever specify which continents? Eusope and Africa would be best bets.
Nope, he specified N. and S. America.

Where? (In the original stipulations, or was it changed by him later?)

spongyblue · Post by **spongyblue** » 2002-11-09 11:57pm

First sentence.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-10 12:00am

spongyblue wrote:First sentence.

Ah. SO I see....somehow I managed to miss that.

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-11-10 10:17pm

verilon wrote:
NecronLord wrote::roll:

raptors are not intelligent enough to take on the romans?

go in behind?

the romans form a testudeo type formation. in the meantime they unsling those crossbows and kill all the raptors (it shoud also be noted that the things in jurassic park aren't velociraptors, they are something with a less cool name, the real velos was about chicken size)
Yes, I know this....that is why I ask about the smaller dinos. And just out of curiosity, Dilophosaurus, anyone?

ACtually real raptors are about the a metre high at the shoulder. Not the two metres of the movies. And Dilophosaurus would be completely owned.

It was a 3m tall primitive ambush predator from the triassic. Not the little hoppy-squirty things from the movie. There is no fossil evidence that it was poisonous OR had a goddam frill.

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-11-10 10:25pm

Darth_Shinji wrote:Okay here are some of the reasons I think the romes would lose.... might as well start some debate in this thread. :)

1) time/logistiscs: very major problem here guys. Do the Roman's even have the resources for an extended campaign across two contents? We are not just talking invation here... complete genocide. They can't even send there entire military over without leaving thier empire defenseless.... even if they do setup cities and try to make the expiditonary force self-succeficent (unlikly considering there mindset.... who would want to live or buy anything from the land of monsters?) It would be a considerable drain on there economy, if not bankrupt it complealty if there are not careful. Time is another part of this problem. Even if they are successful in battle (I'll get to my doubts later), how long is this going to take? Clear out an entire two contents? Anyone doubt at least a hundred years? With no setbacks? I doubt even that soon. And around that time the original emporer is dead (more likely two or so emporers). And entire lives have been spent living and dying.... I don't think the roman people would continue this.

Assuming that the Romans have some knowledge of the physical wealth of the continents... HELL YES THEY STAY ON. Look at how much gold was extracted by the South American cultures. Rome NEEDED GOLD TO SURVIVE. That is all the reason they need.

Anything else is a bonus.

2) Actaully combat: Yes, I have no doubt that roman armies can kill dinosaurs.... in theory. In theory a poisoned ballista can kill a t-rex.... Is it going to stand still? It would charge an army... and who is going to stand with enought organization to effectivly kill one? People are going to die, and while I'm sure alone t-rex would die eventually if the army kept its cool, but I dobt they can. And a t-rex is small fry compared to other problems. What about a brontosaurs herd? You start to hurt the herd and they charge... I feel sorry for that army. And then theres steigasaurs... ooch.

And then theres ultrasaurs.... and that bone they found that belong to a dinosaur bigger than that one.

Oh by the way, there are raptors about as big or almost as big as the movie raptors... I think there called utah raptors.

Yeah, it was Utahraptor. Found about 6 months into production of the movie. Brontosaurs don't exist, they were a mis-indentified aptasaurs.

And the Romans could probably deal quite easily with the predators. They have to in order to survive. But imagine them subdueing and shipping back T-Rexes etc for the arenas.

They would likely attempt to "domesticate" the herbivores and low-grade carnivores to create a better workforce. I mean imagine Roman cav riding Gallimimus' into battle...

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-10 10:27pm

Brontosaurus *is* Apatosaurus...I believe they clarified that in the movie. Then, we also have the Brachiosaurus, the Ultrasaurus, and plenty of others...

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-11-10 10:59pm

verilon wrote:Brontosaurus *is* Apatosaurus...I believe they clarified that in the movie. Then, we also have the Brachiosaurus, the Ultrasaurus, and plenty of others...

Coming from my paleontology background a voice in my head screams out:

"FUCKING HELL! Brontosaurus MIGHT fucking well be Apatosaurus, but the FUCKING MOVIE IS NOT A FUCKING REFERENCE BOOK!"

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2002-11-10 11:07pm

verilon wrote:Brontosaurus *is* Apatosaurus...I believe they clarified that in the movie. Then, we also have the Brachiosaurus, the Ultrasaurus, and plenty of others...

The neck and tail were backwards on Brontosaurus, IIRC. That is, the tailbones were placed at the neck, and the neck bones at the tail, and it wasn't recognized for quite some time. Thus, the Brontosaurus was an Apatosaurus with the pieces put together wrong. And you forgot Diplodocus. Best name among all the dinosaurs. What other dinosaur can you call dippy and have people understand which you're not trying to say they were dumb?

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-11-10 11:15pm

The Dark wrote:
verilon wrote:Brontosaurus *is* Apatosaurus...I believe they clarified that in the movie. Then, we also have the Brachiosaurus, the Ultrasaurus, and plenty of others...
The neck and tail were backwards on Brontosaurus, IIRC. That is, the tailbones were placed at the neck, and the neck bones at the tail, and it wasn't recognized for quite some time. Thus, the Brontosaurus was an Apatosaurus with the pieces put together wrong. And you forgot Diplodocus. Best name among all the dinosaurs. What other dinosaur can you call dippy and have people understand which you're not trying to say they were dumb?

You will all bow down before the might of the pachycephalosaurus...

Or the troodon.

Post by **haas mark** » 2002-11-10 11:24pm

The Dark wrote:
verilon wrote:Brontosaurus *is* Apatosaurus...I believe they clarified that in the movie. Then, we also have the Brachiosaurus, the Ultrasaurus, and plenty of others...
The neck and tail were backwards on Brontosaurus, IIRC. That is, the tailbones were placed at the neck, and the neck bones at the tail, and it wasn't recognized for quite some time. Thus, the Brontosaurus was an Apatosaurus with the pieces put together wrong. And you forgot Diplodocus. Best name among all the dinosaurs. What other dinosaur can you call dippy and have people understand which you're not trying to say they were dumb?

Apparently, I didn't say that Apatosaurus and Brontosaurus were the same thing...But like I said: plenty of others...

Rathark · Post by **Rathark** » 2002-11-11 12:04am

BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Ok, this is the stupidist thread ive seen in quite awhile,

You're obviously new here.

For my next trick I shall debate the results of Professor Xavier, Cyclops, Storm and Magneto vs KISS as portrayed in "Attack of the Phantom"

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2002-11-11 12:09am

Hmm... How effective would a Balista be against a T-Rex?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-11-11 12:13am

Alyeska wrote:Hmm... How effective would a Balista be against a T-Rex?

All but the smallest versions would be lethal I'd expect.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2002-11-11 12:15am

I say KISS wins....hmmm well somehow I think I would really love to see all this in a cheesy movie fashion.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2002-11-11 12:22am

Ghost Rider wrote:I say KISS wins....hmmm well somehow I think I would really love to see all this in a cheesy movie fashion.

Did you mean to post that to this thead?

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2002-11-11 12:23am

Rathark wrote:
BlkbrryTheGreat wrote:Ok, this is the stupidist thread ive seen in quite awhile,
You're obviously new here.

For my next trick I shall debate the results of Professor Xavier, Cyclops, Storm and Magneto vs KISS as portrayed in "Attack of the Phantom"

A combo of this and the humor of seeing Dino going against humans and late night produced said statement really

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2002-11-11 01:10am

2 continents is hella-big. Rome hasn't a prayer.

Post by **weemadando** » 2002-11-11 01:25am

Howedar wrote:2 continents is hella-big. Rome hasn't a prayer.

This is a good point. But the fact remains: Rome would be sinking resources into it because of what stands to be gained.