And now a true OT topic Huns with Dinosaurs attack Da Romanz

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Frazzled**

Borrowed from Historum:

The year is 300 AD, the Roman Empire has emerged from the crisis of the third century with large military forces. On the other side of the Rhine and the Danube, the Germanic tribesman are being displaced by a new threat of riders from the Eastern Steppes: The Huns.

But these riders come not on horseback; rather, riding a with a huge dinosaur army that they have figured out how to control them through rigorous and complex shamanistic rituals. Tyrannosaurus Rex Riders were capable of traveling vast distances at great speed, and were among the greatest horrors on the field of combat. Hordes of Velocirapters stalk their enemy and overwhelm them when they find weakness. Triceratops heavy cavalry charge through with barely the requirement for additional weapons. The thunderous stampedes of the Sauropods make a mouse out of the well engrained memory Hannibal's Carthaginian Elephant forces.

The Huns approach the Rhine and the Danube frontier, and hordes of Germanic refugees pour over fleeing before the TERROR that has befallen them.

You, at the court of Diocletian, are recording the history of the moment in whatever format you choose. How do you see this war going down?

For numbers, let's say approximately 500 T-Rex's, 12,000 Velociraptors, 2800 Triceratops, and 1000 sauropods. They have the ability to replenish these forces to a certain degree from breeding stock, and there are potentially other dinos they haven't launched with yet. They are working on taming flying dinosaurs, but so far they've found they've only been good for delivering messages over vast distances: like passenger pigeons.

**LordofHats**

I think this sums up the feeling;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NmUH02ZOrI

Please be careful with regards to language if you embed a vid or similar.

Ta.

Reds8n

**Easy E**

You fight them the same way you fight elephants. The Romans had proved adept at fighting elephants!

However, that was way before Diocletian's time. In Diocletian's time they would just try to bribe them to go away or hire them on themselves.

Maybe they are just fethed!

**Crazy_Carnifex**

Frazzled wrote:
Borrowed from Historum:

The year is 300 AD, the Roman Empire has emerged from the crisis of the third century with large military forces. On the other side of the Rhine and the Danube, the Germanic tribesman are being displaced by a new threat of riders from the Eastern Steppes: The Huns.

But these riders come not on horseback; rather, riding a with a huge dinosaur army that they have figured out how to control them through rigorous and complex shamanistic rituals. Tyrannosaurus Rex Riders were capable of traveling vast distances at great speed, and were among the greatest horrors on the field of combat. Hordes of Velocirapters stalk their enemy and overwhelm them when they find weakness. Triceratops heavy cavalry charge through with barely the requirement for additional weapons. The thunderous stampedes of the Sauropods make a mouse out of the well engrained memory Hannibal's Carthaginian Elephant forces.

The Huns approach the Rhine and the Danube frontier, and hordes of Germanic refugees pour over fleeing before the TERROR that has befallen them.

You, at the court of Diocletian, are recording the history of the moment in whatever format you choose. How do you see this war going down?

For numbers, let's say approximately 500 T-Rex's, 12,000 Velociraptors, 2800 Triceratops, and 1000 sauropods. They have the ability to replenish these forces to a certain degree from breeding stock, and there are potentially other dinos they haven't launched with yet. They are working on taming flying dinosaurs, but so far they've found they've only been good for delivering messages over vast distances: like passenger pigeons.

Why Tyrannosaurus, and not Tarbosaurus? Where did they find Chasmosaurines for their cavalry?

For once, Velociraptors are actually appropriate, though. Still, terrifying[/sarcasm]

**Frazzled**

Easy E wrote:
You fight them the same way you fight elephants. The Romans had proved adept at fighting elephants!

However, that was way before Diocletian's time. In Diocletian's time they would just try to bribe them to go away or hire them on themselves.

Maybe they are just fethed!

Now there's thinking outside the box. Why fight them when you can buy them.

**jmurph**

Ignoring the massive environmental difference necessary for these creatures to still be alive, how would they feed these enormous creatures? And dispose of their waste? The supply issues for that many would be crippling! How do you keep 500 giant, voracious predatory dinosaurs in line with iron age tools anyway? Triceratops would also be problematic in temperament- remember that historically rhinos weren't used for war. With these particular ornery animals, just send a few spies in to cut the cages open and the animals will eagerly butcher each other. It would be like letting the animals loose from the zoo. A force of all herbivorous sauropods would be much more believable. But then they are just essentially bigger, less intelligent elephants.

As pointed out, Romans were able to handle elephants just fine. The Macedonians long before figured out that peltasts/skirmishers and lines that will let them pass are hell on the poor beasts. Likewise, the Romans employed elephants of their own, so why wouldn't they have their own dinos? Historically, the Romans didn't use the elephants past about 50 AD because their tactics were such that they were ineffective.

Personally, I would just use my steam driven war machines complete with greek fire throwers, refractory lasers, and repeating arbalests. Oh, and my nuclear catapults. That combined with state wizard priests should work well.

**Frazzled**

Logistics has been brought up as a major issue. Also think of the impact of superpredators on the Huns' horse heavy army. I don't see them being able to control the horse herds.

**Crazy_Carnifex**

jmurph wrote:
Ignoring the massive environmental difference necessary for these creatures to still be alive, how would they feed these enormous creatures? And dispose of their waste? The supply issues for that many would be crippling! How do you keep 500 giant, voracious predatory dinosaurs in line with iron age tools anyway? Triceratops would also be problematic in temperament- remember that historically rhinos weren't used for war. With these particular ornery animals, just send a few spies in to cut the cages open and the animals will eagerly butcher each other. It would be like letting the animals loose from the zoo. A force of all herbivorous sauropods would be much more believable. But then they are just essentially bigger, less intelligent elephants.

Point of Order: We have no idea what a these animals temperaments would be. It is entirely possible that a trained Ceratopsid would be actually less cantankerous than your average stallion.

**Easy E**

Frazzled wrote:
Logistics has been brought up as a major issue. Also think of the impact of superpredators on the Huns' horse heavy army. I don't see them being able to control the horse herds.

If they have dinosaurs they are riding, do they still have a horse heavy army, or is it now a dinosaur heavy army?

**jmurph**

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
jmurph wrote:
Ignoring the massive environmental difference necessary for these creatures to still be alive, how would they feed these enormous creatures? And dispose of their waste? The supply issues for that many would be crippling! How do you keep 500 giant, voracious predatory dinosaurs in line with iron age tools anyway? Triceratops would also be problematic in temperament- remember that historically rhinos weren't used for war. With these particular ornery animals, just send a few spies in to cut the cages open and the animals will eagerly butcher each other. It would be like letting the animals loose from the zoo. A force of all herbivorous sauropods would be much more believable. But then they are just essentially bigger, less intelligent elephants.

Point of Order: We have no idea what a these animals temperaments would be. It is entirely possible that a trained Ceratopsid would be actually less cantankerous than your average stallion.

True, but the only indicators we have (IE other predatory animals) is that they would be barely constrained, at best. Most animals that are trained have an intrinsic pack or herd structure that we exploit. Predators are tough because even the pack based predators can only be broken to a limited extent (see, for example, wolves). Solitary hunters are even worse (see tigers). I would expect that the smaller dinos would be easier to handle and some could probably be trained very much like falcons. Still, very limited usefulness for war.

Ceratopsids I compared to rhinos, as they seem to fill comparable niches. Perhaps they are not aggressive and territorial. But the large, armored ridges suggest that they may have butted heads, indicating territorial tendencies. Additionally, there is evidence for an aggressive interaction between a Triceratops and a Tyrannosaurus in the form of partially healed tyrannosaur tooth marks on a Triceratops brow horn and squamosal (a bone of the neck frill); the bitten horn is also broken, with new bone growth after the break. Such a creature could still be useful as a sort of point and release weapon, much like a living heavy chariot. If they are better behaved, we a re back to tougher elephants.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

Would take a lot of provisions to keep that army marching.

Small raiding groups to attack supply lines. See how disciplined their tiny brained mounts remain once a regular supply for food is interrupted...

**Crazy_Carnifex**

jmurph wrote:
Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
jmurph wrote:
Ignoring the massive environmental difference necessary for these creatures to still be alive, how would they feed these enormous creatures? And dispose of their waste? The supply issues for that many would be crippling! How do you keep 500 giant, voracious predatory dinosaurs in line with iron age tools anyway? Triceratops would also be problematic in temperament- remember that historically rhinos weren't used for war. With these particular ornery animals, just send a few spies in to cut the cages open and the animals will eagerly butcher each other. It would be like letting the animals loose from the zoo. A force of all herbivorous sauropods would be much more believable. But then they are just essentially bigger, less intelligent elephants.

Point of Order: We have no idea what a these animals temperaments would be. It is entirely possible that a trained Ceratopsid would be actually less cantankerous than your average stallion.

True, but the only indicators we have (IE other predatory animals) is that they would be barely constrained, at best. Most animals that are trained have an intrinsic pack or herd structure that we exploit. Predators are tough because even the pack based predators can only be broken to a limited extent (see, for example, wolves). Solitary hunters are even worse (see tigers). I would expect that the smaller dinos would be easier to handle and some could probably be trained very much like falcons. Still, very limited usefulness for war.

Ceratopsids I compared to rhinos, as they seem to fill comparable niches. Perhaps they are not aggressive and territorial. But the large, armored ridges suggest that they may have butted heads, indicating territorial tendencies. Additionally, there is evidence for an aggressive interaction between a Triceratops and a Tyrannosaurus in the form of partially healed tyrannosaur tooth marks on a Triceratops brow horn and squamosal (a bone of the neck frill); the bitten horn is also broken, with new bone growth after the break. Such a creature could still be useful as a sort of point and release weapon, much like a living heavy chariot. If they are better behaved, we a re back to tougher elephants.

I assume that you are aware that Ceratopsids did (probably) form herds (see: monospecific bonebeds). Tyrannosaurs as well (although the technical term is a Terror). As for the Triceratops versus Tyrannosaurus combat, it is not evidence of aggression on the Triceratops' part. It is possibly a result of unsuccessful predation by the Tyrannosaurus (although many animals prefer flight, fighting is an option, especially if young are involved). I'll also point out that bulls can be very aggressive, but are part of a domesticated herd species (complete with horns).

**cuda1179**

Personally, I think that the sheer numbers in this hypothetical are downright unrealistic. Isn't that almost as many Dinosaurs as the Huns had actual horses in real life? Even in real life supplying the needs for the animals was an issue.

I think a more realistic number (assuming all these animals could actually be domesticated and controlled, and work together) would be something like 20 T-rex, 500 raptors, 50 Triceratops, and 30 Sauropods.

I think the best use of the Sauropods would be mobile artillery. They are large enough you could mount a trebuchet or multiple balistas on one. It would eliminate the inherent slowness of such weapons and allow for surprise attacks or an ability to counter infantry with rapidly redeployed heavy weapons.

**NinthMusketeer**

Guys we can obviously assume the dinosaurs were fed using the horses, as there is no mention of conventional cavalry.

There is no practical reason why such a force wouldn't function in the hands of the Huns.

**Iron_Captain**

The Roman Empire is pretty big. Large nomadic armies usually subsist on plunder and forage and require more food than a normal army because of their herds of animals. A scorched earth strategy would force them to either turn back or starve before they reach Rome as dinosaurs, unlike horses, can't subsist on just grass. They'd need loads of food.
Also, invest in ballistae.

**BobtheInquisitor**

Seems like dinosaurs would be even more vulnerable to caltrops than horses or elephants.

**Crazy_Carnifex**

Iron_Captain wrote:
The Roman Empire is pretty big. Large nomadic armies usually subsist on plunder and forage and require more food than a normal army because of their herds of animals. A scorched earth strategy would force them to either turn back or starve before they reach Rome as dinosaurs, unlike horses, can't subsist on just grass. They'd need loads of food.
Also, invest in ballistae.

Given that we are already assuming that dinosaurs are adapted to our current atmosphere, it is reasonable to assume that sauropods and ceratopsians would be able to eat grass.

**Gitzbitah**

All good points- but that does beg the question why would the Mongols use their dinosaurs in field battle? There's no question that's where they're at their most vulnerable, and that is the type of warfare the Mongols excel at already.

Instead, imagine the Mongols fighting as they always did, but then besieging their foes with Tyrannosaurus support. How much damage would a 9 ton bundle of muscle and fury cause when it ran into a fortification? Or if, it could be taught to climb? A breach would be inevitable. Send the thing in at night to avoid return fire. A dinosaur may be a big target, but a city is bigger.

**BobtheInquisitor**

They might have had more success in China. "Mandate of Heaven? Are you kidding? Shenlong and Longwang are carrying my water skins for me."

**Iron_Captain**

Crazy_Carnifex wrote:
Iron_Captain wrote:
The Roman Empire is pretty big. Large nomadic armies usually subsist on plunder and forage and require more food than a normal army because of their herds of animals. A scorched earth strategy would force them to either turn back or starve before they reach Rome as dinosaurs, unlike horses, can't subsist on just grass. They'd need loads of food.
Also, invest in ballistae.

Given that we are already assuming that dinosaurs are adapted to our current atmosphere, it is reasonable to assume that sauropods and ceratopsians would be able to eat grass.

Even if they could, they are too large to feed on just grass. Such huge creatures require huge amounts of energy. To get such huge amounts of energy from grass, they'd probably need to graze all day long and would consume vast amounts. To get such vast amounts of grass you need huge grazing grounds which means you won't be able to have more than 2-3 concentrated in one area. That rules out large armies of dinosaurs. It would also mean you'd be the slowest army the world has ever seen, since your animals would spend too much time grazing and have little time left for marching.

There is a reason armies in ancient times never had more than a few elephants. Dinosaurs are even larger, and so would be even more restrictive.

**jmurph**

BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Seems like dinosaurs would be even more vulnerable to caltrops than horses or elephants.

Yikes, good point! While they would have thicker pads, all that weight could be exploited with traps. Imagine pits that even horse can run over, but collapse under the massive beasts. To that end, terrain might effectively deny them from ever being brought to bear.