My favourite battles are those of small specialist forces completely outnumbered against a less developed force but still coming out on top such as:
Rorkes drift
Agincourt
Assaye
Cajamarca
And Thermopylae (I know the Persians won the battle but they still lost in a tactical way)
I remember seeing a documentary about that one, where some historians search for the reason why the French lost. What men the English had the terrain etc. Though I wonder how exactly were the French less developed in that battle?
That is one example that doesn't fit in to my first sentence I just put it there because it was still a smaller force beating a larger force with the same (or better) technology simply because:
RULE BRITANNIA!!!
Well, we had longbows. The horses couldn't carry the heavily armoured knights through the fields.
The French lost three dukes, nine Counts and over ninety bannerets. This is expected when you have seven thousand longbowmen on either side of a narrow valley, the French army was positioned to stop the English advance to Calais.
The English had 6000-9000 men, while the French had 12000-36000. It was a slaughter, the longbows punctured through the armour while the French were locked down in the mud. The English lost 112 men, and the French 10000, with 1500 Noble prisoners took by the English.