Undetected_Killer
Le fuck?
+98|6277|FIYAH FIYAH FIYAAAAAAH
WAIT READ BELOW BEFORE FLAMING

By entire British Army, I mean the entire British Army from the American Revolutionary War period, i.e. 1775 to 1781 versus 100 Modern Day United States Marines. Both have uncountable supplies of ammo. Both sides fight to the death.

Who wins?

P.S. For the sake of argument, neither sides have artillery, or in the Marines' case, helis, tanks, or armored vehicles.
P.P.S. Both armies are armed with the weapons from their own time period.
WAIT READ ABOVE BEFORE FLAMING

Last edited by Undetected_Killer (2008-03-15 18:41:35)

Ollie
Formerly known as Larkin
+215|5975|Halifax, West Yorkshire
Probably the Marines if they had some defensive possition and the British Army couldn't rush them.
SEREMAKER
BABYMAKIN EXPERT √
+2,187|6559|Mountains of NC

https://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh275/potatofamine22/usmc.png
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/17445/carhartt.jpg
SealXo
Member
+309|6527

Undetected_Killer wrote:

WAIT READ BELOW BEFORE FLAMING

By entire British Army, I mean the entire British Army from the American Revolutionary War period, i.e. 1775 to 1781 versus 100 Modern Day United States Marines. Both have uncountable supplies of ammo. Both sides fight to the death.

Who wins?


WAIT READ ABOVE BEFORE FLAMING
100 marines means they could use heli and fux dem up

cannons AA lulz
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6700|England. Stoke
Depends if it just 100 marines with their rifles, or if they had support. The entire British army would have consisted of tens of thousands with shit loads of artillery...
r2zoo
Knowledge is power, guard it well
+126|6587|Michigan, USA
Depends, what are each armed with?  Both with Single shots, Brits hands downa s the Marines arent trained in them

I assume you mean each with thier period armory, in which case Marines have a massive advantage of full auto fire, far better range, and accuracy, and the training to supplement it.  However if it was 100 vs entire army at one time, theyd lose, quality over quanitity only can work so far.
geNius
..!.,
+144|6433|SoCal
You'd have to have a serious geographic advantage to hold off the entire army with 100 soldiers.

I have a ton of faith in our modern tactics and weaponry, but we're talking thousands to 1 ratios here; it's nearly logistically impossible.
https://srejects.com/genius/srejects.png
RECONDO67
Member
+60|6627|miami FL
marksman made the difference in the Independence war and it would again.
guerrilla style warfare would be the best choice for the marines
Ollie
Formerly known as Larkin
+215|5975|Halifax, West Yorkshire

geNius wrote:

You'd have to have a serious geographic advantage to hold off the entire army with 100 soldiers.

I have a ton of faith in our modern tactics and weaponry, but we're talking thousands to 1 ratios here; it's nearly logistically impossible.
Exactly. The Marines would need a heavily fortified building on the top of a nice steep hill to slow the enemy down. If they had no defense they'd just get rushed and eventually blugeoned to death with rifle butts.
NooBesT
Pizzahitler
+873|6460

geNius wrote:

I have a ton of faith in our modern tactics and weaponry, but we're talking thousands to 1 ratios here; it's nearly logistically impossible.
"In this narrow corridor, numbers count for nothing!"
https://i.imgur.com/S9bg2.png
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6700|England. Stoke

Ollie wrote:

geNius wrote:

You'd have to have a serious geographic advantage to hold off the entire army with 100 soldiers.

I have a ton of faith in our modern tactics and weaponry, but we're talking thousands to 1 ratios here; it's nearly logistically impossible.
Exactly. The Marines would need a heavily fortified building on the top of a nice steep hill to slow the enemy down. If they had no defense they'd just get rushed and eventually blugeoned to death with rifle butts.
Even then the massed guns of the Royal Artillery would make a difference...
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|6672|Disaster Free Zone
Using guerilla warfare or a rolling battle field scenario the marines would stand a chance. A stand up battle, the odds are just too highly stacked against them... they have to reload some time.
HurricaИe
Banned
+877|5952|Washington DC
It'd be like 300. If the Marines have a ground advantage they'd rape face. Better trained and better equipment.
Ollie
Formerly known as Larkin
+215|5975|Halifax, West Yorkshire

DrunkFace wrote:

Using guerilla warfare or a rolling battle field scenario the marines would stand a chance. A stand up battle, the odds are just too highly stacked against them... they have to reload some time.
They couldn't possibly engage enough enemies at once to win a war using guerilla tactics...but they wouldn't be beaten either.

EDIT: Oh, and inb4aftersparta.

You bastard!

Last edited by Ollie (2008-03-15 18:55:46)

CosmoKramer
CC you in October
+131|6610|Medford, WI
unless they had a nuke
reaper_654
confused??
+36|6287|ohio,USA
Haha fuck you all except seremaker the marines would win.
Ollie
Formerly known as Larkin
+215|5975|Halifax, West Yorkshire

reaper_654 wrote:

Haha fuck you all except seremaker the marines would win.
https://wizardishungry.com/blog/_/2007/08/nou.gif
Poseidon
Fudgepack DeQueef
+3,253|6529|Long Island, New York
Marines. By far. Reasons being:

1) The british stood in a fucking line. A FUCKING LINE. I know it's the 18th century, but COME ON. They couldn't think of something better than standing in a fucking open field?

2) Superior firepower. Amazing aiming.

3) Snipers.

4) M240.

5) Kevlar.

6) Overall knowledge.

7) If the Brits didn't have cannons or artillery, they'd be so fucked against the marines.
SEREMAKER
BABYMAKIN EXPERT √
+2,187|6559|Mountains of NC

reaper_654 wrote:

Haha fuck you all except seremaker the marines would win.
we would .......... how ........... we fight dirty
https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/17445/carhartt.jpg
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6516|South Florida

NooBesT wrote:

geNius wrote:

I have a ton of faith in our modern tactics and weaponry, but we're talking thousands to 1 ratios here; it's nearly logistically impossible.
"In this narrow corridor, numbers count for nothing!"
Epic
15 more years! 15 more years!
Criminal
yo shut the fuck up charles
+20|6628

Undetected_Killer wrote:

WAIT READ BELOW BEFORE FLAMING

By entire British Army, I mean the entire British Army from the American Revolutionary War period, i.e. 1775 to 1781 versus 100 Modern Day United States Marines. Both have uncountable supplies of ammo. Both sides fight to the death.

Who wins?

P.S. For the sake of argument, neither sides have artillery, or in the Marines' case, helis, tanks, or armored vehicles.
P.P.S. Both armies are armed with the weapons from their own time period.
WAIT READ ABOVE BEFORE FLAMING
cant you douche bags read...
he said neither sides have artillery which in the british case means their cannons and shit.
and im pretty sure m16s and m4s > muskets
so

go marines
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6700|England. Stoke

Criminal wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

WAIT READ BELOW BEFORE FLAMING

By entire British Army, I mean the entire British Army from the American Revolutionary War period, i.e. 1775 to 1781 versus 100 Modern Day United States Marines. Both have uncountable supplies of ammo. Both sides fight to the death.

Who wins?

P.S. For the sake of argument, neither sides have artillery, or in the Marines' case, helis, tanks, or armored vehicles.
P.P.S. Both armies are armed with the weapons from their own time period.
WAIT READ ABOVE BEFORE FLAMING
cant you douche bags read...
he said neither sides have artillery which in the british case means their cannons and shit.
and im pretty sure m16s and m4s > muskets
so

go marines
I can read, just not the future... edit he made about there being no arty
geNius
..!.,
+144|6433|SoCal

Poseidon wrote:

1) The british stood in a fucking line. A FUCKING LINE. I know it's the 18th century, but COME ON. They couldn't think of something better than standing in a fucking open field?
You're talking about thousands of lines in several directions.  Do you honestly believe that the Brits were such horrible shots that they wouldn't eventually kill a simple 100?

This may have been 230 years ago, but they were not stupid.
https://srejects.com/genius/srejects.png
Criminal
yo shut the fuck up charles
+20|6628

coke wrote:

Criminal wrote:

Undetected_Killer wrote:

WAIT READ BELOW BEFORE FLAMING

By entire British Army, I mean the entire British Army from the American Revolutionary War period, i.e. 1775 to 1781 versus 100 Modern Day United States Marines. Both have uncountable supplies of ammo. Both sides fight to the death.

Who wins?

P.S. For the sake of argument, neither sides have artillery, or in the Marines' case, helis, tanks, or armored vehicles.
P.P.S. Both armies are armed with the weapons from their own time period.
WAIT READ ABOVE BEFORE FLAMING
cant you douche bags read...
he said neither sides have artillery which in the british case means their cannons and shit.
and im pretty sure m16s and m4s > muskets
so

go marines
I can read, just not the future... edit he made about there being no arty
ahh didnt catch that.
sorry fine sir

and you know what... hell 100 marines could probably annihilate the entire british army of the present

Last edited by Criminal (2008-03-15 19:05:36)

coke
Aye up duck!
+440|6700|England. Stoke

Criminal wrote:

coke wrote:

Criminal wrote:


cant you douche bags read...
he said neither sides have artillery which in the british case means their cannons and shit.
and im pretty sure m16s and m4s > muskets
so

go marines
I can read, just not the future... edit he made about there being no arty
ahh didnt catch that.
sorry fine sir

and you know what... hell 100 marines could probably annihilate the entire british army of the present
NO

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard