Hernan vs Ivan
God do I hate this guy. Not only because he killed millions of Aztec, but because of him Spain conquered Latin America and now I have to take Spanish class (yes, I do only care about myself). When a more advanced nation (USA) and their overwhelmingly advance armies (NATO) goes to war with another nation (who could that be) just for a simple luxury resource like gold (oil) that really pisses me off. Killing civilians for your own wealth earns you an automatic seat in hell and I hope Cortes rots. Hell, even the Mexicans hate Cortes, even though he technically founded modern Mexico with his conquests uniting all the scattered native territories.
Oh yeah, funny thing about his weapons. I found a history book with a painting showing the Conquistadors use all three weapons on the show. The NOT SO FUNNY thing about this, the painting is of the genocide against the Aztecs and the weapons are killing dozens of civilians. Just because some of these guys are from centuries ago, doesn’t mean we can forget their crimes.
Conquistadors- God, they got slaughtered in the fight, it’s like how Darth Vader leads his Stormtroopers but they can’t do shit so the ‘big bad’ has to do everything himself. I mean one Russian gets shot, that’s it, while Cortes kills 4 guys alone! Ok, ignoring the fight-About the warriors themselves… they, in my mind, look like a bunch of rich guys who want to get richer, so like real capitalists, they don’t care who’s in the way of their money. Their success is more of superior weapons, numbers and biological warfare than anything else. Yes, there are exceptions, I’m sure some were good, but overall it’s that.
Matchlock Arquebus- Yeah… if you need a lit match to fire a gun, I can see why no one uses fuses- RAIN. Poof, there goes the match, here comes the misfire. But otherwise, I see why muskets were used. If a common foot soldier can shoot and kill a fully armored and highly skilled Knight or Samurai, I know what weapon I’ll be giving my troops- an Ak-74 because matchlocks are 400 years out of date.
Espada Ropera- I like rapiers, and I like rapiers that can cut. It gives you skill and versatility…. on foot. Now since you have the halberd, with twice the range and able to disable horseriders, it just makes sense that you would use swords more for horseback than foot. And, uh…. It’s a crap horse weapon. How do you not get a lethal strike on a still target!?
Alabarda Spanish Halberd- I want to hear a holy catholic choir when I saw this weapon, then I realize how unholy the user of this weapon was. Oh well… The Halberd was known for being the most effect European weapon in ancient warfare, and this latest design proves it. Range, multiple heads, and lethality while still being light for a polearm. It is a perfect melee weapon.
Armor- Steel Chestplate and Helmet
Ivan the Terrible
Ivan the Terrible’s ability to kill and conquer is shown in history, but does this make him an effective warrior or were his enemies just too weak? The Livonian War [a lengthy costly loss for Russia] and rebellions against the Tsardom show Ivan’s inability to stabilize his nation or use his army effectively. He accidentally killed his son in a bipolar fit of rage only to sob over his corpse/ he massacred thousands of civilians every month (oh boy, that’s a bad habit you need to break) / asked Queen Elizabeth I of England to marry him [my god, Ivan should be in the next Civilization 6 game]/ lead a secret police that terrorized his nation under religious dictatorship and yet is more sane than Pol Pot. Huh… this Pol Pot guy must be real f***ed up in the head.
Oprichniks- Ok, guys looking like the grim-reaper riding on horses with a decapitated dog head… yes, decapitated dog head. Well they be scary enough for sh**-ing your pants, but are so easy to kill with a halberd.
Piscal- Does having a sight make you aim better with a musket? I guess, but muskets are too close range for that to matter much. Does having twice the rate of fire help? Yeah, especially for muskets. If two guns are exactly the same, I repeat- EXACTLY the same, except one is faster- than the faster one wins.
Sablia- I mentioned this sword to be my favorite. The sword is accurate and lethal, making it perfect for horseback. Also it is a long sword.
Bardiche- Everything bigger In Russia (from their axes to girl spy tits) but sometimes size and weight can hold you back. What a disappointment, that the most awesome looking axe on the show’s history is too heavy to be used practically in battle. Also, how the hell does it not decapitate you in one swing?
Armor- Chainmail wit small metal plates (to small and thin to really do anything)
I was voting for Ivan to win just because I wanted Cortes to lose- I jumped for joy when the piscal penetrated Cortes’ armor because I just hate Cortes, but my dislike blinded me from his effectiveness as a warrior (I WANT to say that, but they won’t show us the actual f**king numbers so I can’t say how effective the weapons were, so I can’t fully agree on the numbers if I never even see them!) The very reason to hate this guy is because he was effective in war.
Despite being a gunfight, the guns aren’t that much of a gamechanger compared to later gunfighters. Why? Cause their guns are sh*t. Matchlock misfires, is relatively inaccurate and slow to reload- the only reason not to have a bow is ‘cause muskets are easier to learn and it can pierce armor. Useful yes, but not useful enough to change warfare at the time.
Some fans ask why Washington’s rapier was better than Napoleon’s saber was worse, yet the opposite is true for Cortes vs Ivan (rapier vs saber). 2 reasons I see. 1- on foot, Cortes may prefer to use his poleaxe instead, so swords were more focused on horse only, maybe. This ment that Cortes’ sword, with the obvious horseback disadvantage, would be worse. Washington’s sword was ok on horseback, but Cortes’ SUCKED.
Hernan Cortes proves that you don’t need to be [completely] insane to be evil and effective. It’s easy to hate a greedy bastard, but if Cortes didn’t conquer Mexico some other conquistador would have anyways.