Number of soldiers: Both Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun had access to large armies, but Genghis Khan's army was generally larger than Attila's. Genghis Khan's army was also more diverse, with soldiers from a variety of ethnic groups and cultures.
Military tactics: Genghis Khan was a master of military strategy and tactics, and he was known for his use of innovative tactics, such as the feigned retreat and the use of mounted archers. Attila the Hun was also a skilled military leader, but he was more reliant on brute force than on strategy.
Terrain: The terrain on which the battle took place would also have a significant impact on the outcome. Genghis Khan was a master of fighting in open terrain, while Attila the Hun was more comfortable fighting in close quarters.
Leadership: Both Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun were charismatic and inspiring leaders, but Genghis Khan was more focused on long-term goals and strategic planning, while Attila the Hun was more focused on short-term gains and immediate gratification.
Motivation: The motivation of the soldiers would also play a role in the outcome of the battle. Genghis Khan's soldiers were motivated by a desire to conquer and expand their empire, while Attila the Hun's soldiers were motivated by a desire for plunder and revenge.
In conclusion, it is difficult to say who would win in a war between Genghis Khan and Attila the Hun, as there are a number of factors that could be considered in assessing the potential outcome of such a conflict. However, given the size of their armies, their military tactics, the terrain on which the battle took place, their leadership, and the motivation of their soldiers, it is possible that Genghis Khan would have emerged victorious.