What made Roman military tactics so much better than their opponents (who usually outnumbered them)?

Answer 1

The romans (and the greeks before them) were one of the only societies of the time to have a standing army. The army's only purpose was to further the empire. Other societies at the time still held with fighting through an untrained militia. So if you have 1,000 untrained men swinging axes and clubs wildly, against 200 well trained/equipped veterans. Who do you think would win.

Answer 2

They were trained to fight as like one soldier. They would have some soldiers help protect while at the same time other soldiers used spears to attack. Think about 300. Spartan military tactics in the movie and real life were similar to the tactics of the Roman military. This is probably where they learned them from.

Answer 3

discipline, and armor on some occasions, too.

for example Galli /qui ipsorum lingua Celtae/ used to go into the combat naked, painted in blue, trying to demoralise the enemy. In fact, the Celts were kinda head hunters, while the Legions were a more advanced unit.

Usually the lack of discipline lead to the loss of the battle, much like some centuries later the battle at Anzincourt, where the French Chivalry happened to be wiped out by the English archers, due to the haste attack of the French knights.

The Roman army was facing the decimation punishment in case of unauthorized withdrawal or cowardiness. that made them very effective fighters, when properly used. the legion concept usually failed in the forrested areas of the Germania.

Answer 4

Your question sounds very simple,but the answer is extremely
complicated;discipline?all Phalanx armies had excellent discipline and the professional ones top class training(Greeks,Carthagenians);Romans had a great advantage in numbers against immediate enemies;Italy south of Gallia Cisalpina(Gaul south of the Alps)
was the most populated aerea in the Mediterranean.Gaius Marius reorganization of the Roman army made it the most flexible and versatile infantry in the aerea.(Legion 6000,cohort 600 divided into five manipuli of 120 men each).On the contrary Macedonian infantry(predominant in eastern Mediterranean) got heavier(16 deep) and heavier and they forgot that Alexander used his cavalry in combination with other arms for the decisive break of the enemy lines;the other professional armies were mercenaries very well trained infantries which Cartagenians used to employ.Yet the Romans would never have conquered eastern
Mediterranean if the Greeks were united;they beat them piecemeal.Hannibal the Carthaginian in 217-218 caused Romans 100000 casualties in four battles;no other state would have survived after that drain;Rome did survive and raised more armies to defeat Carthage;all the other enemies of Rome were barbarians no special tactics was needed but
the flexibility and versatility of the legions sufficed.(Germans,Visigoths,Dacians,Britons...etc).So Rome lost many battles but never lost a war...until the Parthian horsemen
anihilated Crassus at Carrae in Lydia in 54BC.Rome had no real antidote against Barbarian cavalry armies so slowly but surely it crambled in 476 AD.The Roman army had remained
unchanged for too long(basically for 700 years)and the world evolved around Rome...

Answer 5

Good administration and discipline, a more sophisticated civilization with more specialization. Also, it should be noted that Roman armies werent always the greatest. Near the end of the first roman empire they were manned by a large percentage of germanic mercenaries who did not have the morale or training to win battles. Earlier roman armies were manned by citizens who had more of a vested interest in obtaining or retaining land.

Answer 6

E-a million, E-2 etc by E-9. then you definately've WO-a million, WO-2 and WO-3. After that, you have O-a million, O-2 etc by O-10. Now, in case you desire to appreciate what those ability, it would count number on the dept of provider you're speaking approximately. interior the Air tension, you have Airman effortless, Airman, Airman firstclass, Sergeant, team Sergeant, Technical Sergeant, grasp Sergeant, Senior grasp Sergeant, and finally chief grasp Sergeant. Then the WO's or warrant officers, yet there are no interior the Air tension, was once, yet no longer to any extent further. The for officers, you have 2nd Lieutenant, First Lieutenant, Captain, considerable, Lieutenant Colonel, Colonel, Brigadier time-honored, considerable time-honored, Lieutenant time-honored, and finally time-honored. each and each branch of the militia has their very very own names for each paygrade, however the paygrades are each and all the comparable.

Answer 7

The fact that they worked as a team and not as individuals; they would fight in formations and their discipline allowed them to easily defeat their enemies once their enemies penetrated their formations and found themselves enveloped by the Romans. They also used heavy weapons and wore body armor in most cases, their enemies usually did not.

Answer 8

It wasn't just their tactics.
New shows on the History Channel recently explained that Roman armor and their weapons were much more efficient and effective than their opponents.
Try looking up "Ancient Discoveries" and "Digging for the Truth" on www.history.com for more information.

The shows gave excellent descriptions and recreations of the Roman armor and weaponry that were lighter, and allowed the soldiers more agility and freedom of movement to dodge arrows, spear blows, and cannonballs faster. Their shields were lighter and yet stronger with steel and bronze.
Have fun exploring history.

Answer 9

Standardized weapons and tactics and excellent interior lnes of communications. Their leaders were trained and worked in coordination.

remember they fought Societies that had individual not unit goals.

Ret. USAF SNCO

Answer 10

They picked the battle field and were always one step ahead of their enemy. They were well trained and were always prepared.