Added: 3 years ago
From: sheikhmango
Views: 33,349
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (115)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Where did the Arab horses come into this?. The facts are right, but the film is a bit of a dud.

  • This was quite an entertaining movie, but completely bullshit in terms of realism. This was a battle between two nomad armies, which both use horse archers as their primary weapon. The double sword tactics would have been completely pointless because the enemy would simply shoot up the small unit just like Genghis' troops did at the end. Genghis won because his troops were better organised, better motivated and better led. Not cos their enemy were retarded and didn't know how to use bows.

  • Stalin did the same. Any soldier that left battle field was shot by his own army...

  • Archers - teamkillers!

  • The tactics in this clip look like a pile of shit.

  • your basing mongol battle strategy off of a movie clip? read your history kid. Mongol battle strategy mainly consisted of mass highly accurate horse archers running around keeping distance while showering their enemies with arrows at the same time. Even while they were retreating, they could still cause enormous casualties.

    You really think men on horseback with a couple of swords is the reason Genghis Khans empire was so enormous? lol funny.

  • An entire army won't chase after five retreating guys.

  • @wpaxton if they are untrained, uneducated, and indisciplined they will

  • @MrTimeb0mb No they won't. You may get a couple of idiots to chase after them but there were five Mongols retreating. The entire army wouldn't chase after them. The guys eight rows back wouldn't chase them because they know they not only won't get to kill them, so it will be a waste of their energy, but they won't even get to see them get killed, so it will be a waste of their time as well. This is just a rediculous movie that does things for pure entertainment value.

  • @wpaxton haha ya i know it is a stupid movie, and ya i guess your right

  • the small riding force was a suicide squad , used to draw enemy forces to the range of Mongol firepower, mangudai i think was the name they were called, dualwielders or archers, so wasnt a fake retreat ^^ was a suicide mission , plus yes they would shot retreating soldiers just like the russians in WW2 ... and the army gengis had wasnt so small, they burn and pillage small enemy villages , drees the prisioners as theyre own and send them in the front of the battle to see what the enemy was doing

  • kill all mother fuck china cheap shit

  • double swords!!!??? silly...sooo silly......

    and those archers got to shot 3+ volleys before the cavalry could reach them at 50m?!!!

    this movie might be fun, but it is military and historically a pure fiction...

  • double swords!!!??? silly...sooo silly......

  • lol nice you can turn off light and on :o

  • kürsad ve 40 ceri

  • This was the director's representation of the 'mangudai', which were supposedly suicide troops of the Mongol horde originating from the 13th century. These death squads were supposedly used to draw enemy forces out into the open, where they would be exposed to superior Mongol firepower. Nonetheless, it should be noted that many other descriptions of the mangudai do exist.

  • the cenarist said that he' inspired the fighting scene from legend of Kurshad and his 40ceri

    And hilal tactic been used by all mongoloids (it doesnt mean mongolian it mean people from central asia)

  • i like how badass the Mongolian riders look at 0:13

  • From my reading, the Mongols used bows extensively as a first part of battle. Then, if necessary, they would have swords, axes or other weapons at the ready. The Mongol heavy cavalry would be armed with pole weapons. They would all use fake retreats, flanking, encircling (leaving a way out to shoot the retreating enemies) and intimidation techniques.

    Again, I only learned this by reading various materials. Please correct me if I am wrong in any way. This is a topic that interests me very much.

  • @FailDoctor In general you are right but in this special case you are wrong becouse here its the battle of (later) Dschingiz Khan against his former friend Jamuqa. Both are mongol leader and the battle is in an earlier time. Due to that thay hadn't very "hightech" weapons/units as they had later, when the mongolish tribes were united by Dschingiz. And mongolish tactics like fake retreats won't work either.

  • @Adoeniz Mongol Tactics, not Mongolish =/

  • It's from an upcoming movie called Mongol. Just search for the theatrical trailer. Of course it's not all true, but like the movie 300, it's based around his life and what he did.

  • the ending makes me sad and i feel so bad about how they blow away their own guys.... what movie is that

  • BEWARE THE KHARA KHITAI THEY ARE WHITOUT HONOUR

    aoe 2

  • they killed thier own!! wtf?!?!!?!?!?

  • @wtfboomguy they did that because the horse men were on a death wish meaning if they came back alive it was a great dishonor

  • that sounded very real and by the way this was impossible. There is no way that 30 some could take out 1000 some.. just no possible plus the other side was armed with spears which gives them range and they could throw it. plus there is no way that 2 scimitars can take out 20 guys bc he has to fight from both sides. its complete crap but a very nice scene to watch but not for the actual validity.

  • @emiliskool that things that you mentioned called battle strategies...how to win using only few soldiers...

  • BAD ASS !! they don't call them devil horsemen for nothing

  • man , the archers mongols attacked their same side?!! why because they have bad accuracy or treason?

  • OWNAGE!

  • I dont usually comment on these stuff cause most people that leave comments are idiots. But i couldnt help getting some facts straight. This is a Russian film, and is not historically accurate. Russians dont like making historical films for some reason. Anyway, the battle did occur, but there were no scimitar wielding fanatics, although Mongols are known to not show much sympathy to anyone. Anyway, how the fuck did you get to talk about Poles and Turks is beyond me....

  • @Divljak12 saying all Russians don't like to make historically accurate films is kinda racist

  • @123pointless Well i am Serbian, so i dont see how i can be much racist towards Russians. But Mongol is a half-historic film, and so is 1612, and a few other modern Russian epics. Greater problem are people who learn history through films, i know couple of guys that think 300 is an accurate historical movie. WTF?

  • All polish are animals to hunt down and kill! hahahahaha

    TURKS AND MONGOLS ARE MASTER OF THE UNIVERSE!

  • damn those dudes with the scimitars must have known they were going to their deaths when they rode out, guts

  • 3:13 mindblowing!!

  • what movie is this?

  • One kebab please!

  • @Victor93PL

    ONE FUCKED RUSSIAN ON A TURKISH SPEERHEAD PLEASE HAHAHAHAHA

    yess russian bastard

    u and the other european will die 2050 by turkish energy swords!

    HAHAHAHAHA

  • Comment removed

  • @TimeTimer3000

    I am a Pole (Poland - PL).

    You are another turkish wuss in Germany.

    Are you remember Vienna 1683?  ;p

    HAHA! Poland FTW!

  • awesome scene, and excellent movie.

  • awesome !

  • if mongolians started retreat it will become mongolian victory anyway!!! if they started to fight until death it will probably lose anyway!!  "man borns in ger(yurt) and dies in battlefield"

  • This is just a movie. Someone's... actually director's fiction... no one shoots his own soldiers when he wins. Stupid... Specially, the Mongols would never do that because they had less number of soldiers than anyone else...

  • @WartaNirun dude on this movie this is the only battle or are more?

  • @WartaNirun sorry but i didnt see anything about shooting his own soldiers...probably you missaw...

  • @WartaNirun in ww2 in russia there were death squads look it up

  • @WartaNirun

    Why not? They still lost far less men than the enemy. They sent a small detachment against a large detachment on purpose.

  • @WartaNirun if you wait for your own soldiers to get back to safety, then then enemy will break through your archers and massacre everyone. If you tell the soldiers to keep charging, then the enemy wont charge so you don't get the advantage of arrows.

  • Too naive opinions.

  • @WartaNirun yup ur right, mongols never wasted lives if it weren't necessary, their tatic usually involved luring the enemy army or cavalry into ambushes, for cavalry they relied more on hidden pike mens who usually make retreat impossible for enemy cavalry. They block off all routes, For infantry they never charged straight in, they usually circle out side the range of infantry units and arrow down, This broke infantry formations and They retreat, making it look like rout

  • @WartaNirun they make the soldier run all over in different directions, enemy eases down after 1 week or so they even disband the large mass of troops, And Mongols attak the divided troops while they on their way back to home. And most famous tatic is mobility, they strike where there are not much troops causing that nations mass army to constantly move around and around and around until their morals are low, Mongols then strike the exhausted army, Mongols were superb campers lol advantage!

  • @WartaNirun plus u wuldnt send such a smore number of horse men at the enemy, even for a fake retreat, cause realisticly tht number of men wouldnt have the momentum behind them to even get a chance to retreat, ud atleast send a whole cavalry sqaudron if not 2

  • @WartaNirun

    I think you will find that did happen.

  • 2 words..steel balls

  • Can somebody tell me full name of this movie?

  • "MONGOL" director-sergei bodrow. Its just a movie

  • it could be that ghengis khan got his archers to shoot the riders cause of cowardice, but that wouldn't make sense. neither would it make sense that the archers would shoot their own people by mistake. mongolian archery was arguably the finest in the world. This entire scene doesn't make sense militarily or historically, but who cares? it's cool! for the audience anyway.

  • genghis khan/ ENGLISH/=chinggis khaan /mongolian/

  • its not quentin its sergei bodrow

  • quentin is a beast

  • This is a bunch of hype...A Single thin line of hoursemen would not have lasted that long. Further more his battles were chaotic and brutal. And lastly horse archers were the back bone of his attacks. He would pepper the enemy w/ missiles & retreat when they pursue. Luring his enemy into traps and ambushes. Then he would take what was left of the routing/broken enemy forces w/ close combat techniques. This was pure hollywood. Temuchin would laugh at such child's play.

  • pure hollywood?? lol

  • its not holly

  • this really is a tactic the mongols used though! if you were to research they really did used such tactics. even the director said it himself along with other mongolians.

  • Don't be foolish...first of all I'm a historian. All I do is research. 2nd of all...of course the director said that's what they did. He made the movie in his own image. And 3rd of all of course the mongolians said so. They're broke and want any publicity they can get. Further more if YOU researched, maybe then you would have a fond appreciation for warfare. In any case...check it out. No cavalry charge w/in a thin line could ever hope to defeat a ranked infantry. Spank that.

  • A historian, you sure sound like one with the hate speech towards mongolians. Better yet, coming on youtube to talk about history lmao. Go find a blog diq head, and waste more of your pathetic life there.

  • idk if u are a historian.. because of ur youtube username being "teamxxxsleep" cause if u are a historian then ur name should be more mature, also what kind of historian says "spank that"??? that just doesn't sound like a historian to me..

  • @ZackSephiris you can not have a degree to be a historian, you can pretty much be nothing to be1, i.e. amature historians.

  • @lexiconofskin165 true dat bro

  • they didn't defeat them. And for a researcher your facts seem to be unsupported by any relevant examples. In fact in seems that your research was simply watching this video and coming to a conclusion that was not only inaccurate but an absolute that could never be proved.

  • It's just a fantasy. Twin blade horse man? No way in real history.

    Where's the cavalry archers and partian shoot, the symbol of mongolian army??

  • im a bit surprised, Genghis' riders with side blades didn't make easy targets to those opposing riders with spears with a longer reach,,, they could have easily been toppled off their horses... BTW, cool tactic though...

  • talk about friendly fire

  • That is totally a gossip and a fake story just like that of Hollywood martial artists flying in the air. The real battle strategy of Ghenghiz could also be thrilling that is lacked by the director.

  • The famous battle technique of Ghenghiz Khan was called 'Tulughma' meaning overall in Turkish and Moghul language. He did avoid even least own casualties. If someone thinks of his sending suicide missions or bands is absolutely wrong. HIs tactic Tulughma was for the last used by King Babar of India in the battle of Kanvaha against Rana Sanga of India.

    It can not be discussed here but the main role was of the band of archers with short bows made of yak horns shooting in gallop.

  • Actually this type of tactic really happened while Genghis Khan fought against his close friend. A number of Genghis Khan's platoon did a feign retreat. Where hiding archers would ambush the following enemy. But they didn't shoot their own cavalry. Sucks how movies distort everything to make it look all "cool" and entertaining.

  • what were those mean called with double swords and cool armor?

  • urud manguds

  • Yeah you might be right. this is just a movie. makes no sense for Mongol leader to waste any soldeir's life because they often were outnumbered in battles. yet they came out victorious consistently. Genghis was so ahead of his time that even today military leaders study and apply his techniques. according to the director, they use real mongolian men for the battle scenes and used their ideas. this scene is so cool with the double swords.

  • this movie is MOVIE. consider that mongols population was 500.000 at that time. khan never sent suicide forces. if he did after tons of battle he would have had no men alive. Why does he use false retreat techinque ? to save lives. No honor for fight till die , honor for the winner alive . That was the rule. Don't underestimate khan based on this movie.

  • why dont the archers try to avoid killing their own? i dont see why such good soldiers have to die when it was avoidable... hmm khan was a vile one after all

  • yeah I agree with you about wasting good soldiers. military leaders in the past usually didn't try to protect the lives of their soldiers as they do now. they battle out in the open where chance of mass slaughtering is greatest. even in the American civil war, they shot at each other point blank range, no hiding. with this scene, I think the first cavalry was a suicide mission upon whose death would bestow the highest honor. they weren't suppose to come back alive.

  • i think your are right its whas a suicide mission ther only weak ther force's so the archer's can kill the rest of the enemy

  • kahn is freakinn awesome!

  • this movie kills 300, its not even close in any way

  • it is said that khasar , genghis khan's younger brother had an ability to hunt down the deer half km away(500 beer) which is thought as just "nice ability" and they had some real archers like on this movie that could really make it the farthest. like 300 types of bows . kool huh ?

  • I read somewhere that a nephew of Genghis shot and killed a hunted animal from over 700 yards away. they learn to shoot on horseback as kids. as men, their archery skills were probably unmatched. wish I was there to see it.

  • i like to touch my nipples when i u know what.

  • what the hell does that have to do with anything..?

  • masterbate

  • but the movie is a bit boring

  • the archers are killing theyre own horseman

  • orlly?

  • love it what movie it on?

  • its called mongol the untold story of geghis ghan

  • this movie looks a lot like 300 based on this scene. and that can only mean that its awesome.

  • These dual wielders are only in the movie or else Mongols did have elite soldiers named Mangudai they were archers..

  • seems like you have been playing AOE2 aloot. lol

  • I have that game, it's boring

  • mangudai is 'Real' army.

  • does anyone know the name of the warriors dual weilding those sabres?

  • mongols r good fighters

  • hell yeah they were

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more