Board Thread:Antaeus' Arena: Audience Chamber/@comment-4531192-20140102134332/@comment-26484881-20140105180151

Remember, both camps have different fighting styles and to compare them is to completely ignore the styles. The Romans will do much better in open-field battles with flat, even terrain where they have the time to make everything perfect. They, however, will suffer in cramped, narrow terrain and are highly susceptible to flanking maneuvers.

The Greeks however too are good in open field battles. The hoplite phalanx is terrific at stopping a Roman cohort from overrunning its ranks, so long as the phalanx is not disrupted or flanked. The Greeks will also utilize magic more extensively, something the Romans seem to do more conservatively. In a straight out sword fight, the Greeks will win, so long as the Pegasi are used effectively, magical abilities, traps and items/weapons are used effectively, and that they have reserves to back up the main battle line. If these are neglected, the Roman ranks will win, as the Roman legionary is trained to win a battle of attrition, meaning that they win by tiring an enemy out. The Greeks utilise short swords as well, notably the xiphos, but they are leaf shaped, more for slashing than stabbing. There is no room for slashing in pitch combat. In a one-on-one fight, the Greeks also have a good chance of winning thought it is 50 - 50, as the Greek has more flexibility & agility and utilises magic more while the Roman has the upper hand in armour quality and equipment quality.