Titus001

The roman legion at 150AD would kill the army at 400AD in my opinion.The legions of old at 150AD had better armour and might of been better deciplined then the legion at 400AD.Constantine the so called great made in my opinion one of the worst decisions ever in war by making the roman army more defensive by using more cavarly to cover the vast distance of the empire instead of sticking with what worked in the past.And dont say heavy cavarly killed the legions of old b/c thats just a myth, just like the partians against the romans.Heavy cavarly for the most part would always lose to a deciplined heavy infantry with combined arms which the romans used very well.And constantine made the legions smaller in size for some odd reason.So constantine made the legions=infantry smaller and made the cavarly more of a focus and more funds for cavarly.Thats why some people think the legions at 150AD were better then the legions at 400AD b/c of more barbarians in the roman army which changed the style of the legion and made cavarly more of a focus.

Constantine the great made the infantry smaller compared to the legions of 150AD.I dont know why you say constantine made the army bigger,infact he made the infantry smaller and more defensive by using and making cavarly more of a role in war then before.Just compare the pics by the legion at 150AD and 400AD.

Decimus Caesar-------The sheer size of the Late Roman army would have made it difficult to equip. After all it had doubled in number since the reforms of Diocletian and Constantine. Usually the best pickings for the armour and helmets would go to the Scholae. Titus001------ I think you are wrong about constantine making the army of rome bigger,i think he made the infantry smaller and he made cavarly more of a focus.So he made the infantry smaller made the cavarly bigger=more funding training and armour for cavarly in which b/c of this strategy which i think is more of a defensive mind of thinking made the legions of old with less training and armour and also funding b/c more money was going to cavarly.I think this was a big mistake by rome.

Yes this game would be fun for you if you like legions and the roman army.Your specs should be at the very least 512MB with 1.8ghz,if any lower i would not get this game or get a new pc or upgrade.

Well, who won the battle?

Nice video wotwotius i was trying to find it on the history channel website but had no luck.

So anyone here have any info on this subject,or a link to a website for me?

Check this video,only 2 mins long and shows maps of most empires from egypt to now.

Very cool map on all empires since egypt all the way to our current date.

I was wondering what kind of relations did the mongols and the byzantines have?Did they ever go to war and have a battle?Were the byzantines a vassal state?I read some where that one of the byzantine kings was so scared of the mongols that he married off his daughter to the mongols.We can also talk about the mongols relations with all of europe also.

Here is a video with a Byzantine flame thrower. http://www.history.com/minisite.do?content...p;mini_id=52979

Many pictures are at this website. http://www.roman-empire.net/army/army-pictures.html

Voruenus if want great pictures of the legion and maps i would try Roman empire.net.

One thing i dont get about the late roman army is that the infantry, i mean the legions to me looked like they had less armour and less equipped like the legions at 150AD.Is it just me or do you guys agree?Not saying the legions in 350AD at the time of constantine were bad soldiers or not deciplined they just dont look well armed as the legions at 150AD.I think the legions at 150AD were better armed,armoured and might have been better deciplined in the infantry department.I do think the cavarly at 350AD were more advanced then the cavarly at 150AD.But i just think the army of ROME at 150AD was superior to the army at 350AD and beyond all the way when the western empire fell.