|
Tomn posted:Makes sense. So did open field bayonet melees occur regularly throughout the Enlightenment era, between more veteran units? One thing to note is that like modern day assaults, you would not go straight in with a bunch of infantry and try to stab the other side to death. You would want to demoralise and reduce them with artillery and musketry before breaking them with a bayonet charge (if necessary). You could also rout units without charging them either, there's more than one way to skin that cat. The best example I can think of is the battle of Culloden where the Scottish highland troops charged the bayonet armed British loyalists and there was a major melee. However the Jacobites were not armed with muskets and intentionally aimed to get into melee as their first choice, so it's not quite the same situation. It also wasn't particularly protracted as the Jacobites broken in less than an hour of fighting.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
Why did the Germans win the Battle of France?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Tias posted:Oh gently caress no, imagine if they showed up, decided the southern secessionists, open carry wankers and other freepers actually had it right and started Civil War 2?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Everyone makes fun of AT-ATs, but what would have been the best way to attack Echo Base on Hoth? It's an ice planet. A brief siege would have been enough to break the rebels and the Imperial fleet would have been better deployed in depth to prevent the transports from successfully fleeing. PS. Hi Porkface, I see you've decided to start trolling the thread again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
So warfare was basically "soften the guys up with a barrage of something, then rush them on foot or horseback and maybe they break" for a pretty long time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:So warfare was basically "soften the guys up with a barrage of something, then rush them on foot or horseback and maybe they break" for a pretty long time. Field battles are only one part of warfare. During the early modern era sieges were more important.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 18:59
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Why did the Germans win the Battle of France? It was considered vital to fight the war on Belgian soil rather than French. That was the whole reason the Maginot line was built in the first place - not to defeat the invasion but to force an invading army to come in through the north where the roughly north-south flowing rivers in Belgium could be used as natural defensive lines. An armored thrust was expected, but it was believed that it would have to come through Belgium as the territory south of there (but north of the Maginot line) was impassible to tanks. As it happened this wasn't the case and the Germans drove a lot of armor through the Ardennes. The Germans broke through at Sedan, which caused the Meuse line in general to fold. To make matters worse, once the line was cracked in half Gamelin was replaced with Weygand who was kind of an idiot. He canceled a counter-attack that would have tried to stabilize the situation and wasted days courting politicians in Paris. That delay let the Germans shove a bunch of infantry divisions into the gap so that when a counter-attack eventually happened they were able to repulse it. Counterfactuals are a bitch, but if they had attacked when Gamelin wanted to there is a chance that they might have encircled the armored spearhead or at least forced a withdrawal and stabilized the line. Instead you end up with Rommel running to the Channel and some of the best units in the French army stuck in a pocket. After that the situation was pretty turbo-hosed and it's doubtful anyone could have fixed it. There is other stuff (some notable mismanagement of armored assets) but those are the broad strokes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:i doubt they'd respect the fat dudes on rascal scooters any more than we do Wasn't one of your commanders a really fat dude that had some awesome coaches or something? I suspect that they'd be OK with rascals as long as they were suitably blinged out.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:It's an ice planet. A brief siege would have been enough to break the rebels and the Imperial fleet would have been better deployed in depth to prevent the transports from successfully fleeing. dsyp
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Some of the French gear was pretty good and iirc they also had a fairly well equipped and subtantial reserve as well, if memory recalls. Some of the tanks and planes I can recall being fairly good but just not well used, for example.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Wasn't one of your commanders a really fat dude that had some awesome coaches or something? I suspect that they'd be OK with rascals as long as they were suitably blinged out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alessandro_dal_Borro piccolomini was also somewhat hefty https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottavio_Piccolomini HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 19:18 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
Disinterested posted:Some of the French gear was pretty good and iirc they also had a fairly well equipped and subtantial reserve as well, if memory recalls. Some of the tanks and planes I can recall being fairly good but just not well used, for example. The French tanks had thick armour and kickass guns compared to what the Germans were packing, but they also had terrible one-man turrets and short operational range.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:alessandro dal borro, nobleman and warrior, recipient of numerous honors from the House of Austria, while rad, is not one of the people i study Tell me you can't see him on a rascal trimmed out with crushed velvet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
The B1-Bis has to be one of the funnier vehicles of the war.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Tell me you can't see him on a rascal trimmed out with crushed velvet. edit: and you may have been thinking of wallenstein, who was very ill half the time and traveled on a litter then, when he was well enough to be moved at all. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 19:26 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:21
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:it still impresses me that he died as a result of wounds received not only in in combat but in naval combat. i mean, is there even enough room on a galley for him? Ah yeah, I think I conflated the two. Now I kind of want to see a reenactment cav charge using rascals.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Discpline and training help a lot yeah. Crassus' legions broke fighting spartacus and they were fairly green. So I think it's a level of training thing. I don't remember it mentioning Hey Gal's guys having a band of fresh recruits being raised without veterans mixed in often. White Mountain being a notable exception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:Crassus' legions broke fighting spartacus and they were fairly green. So I think it's a level of training thing. I don't remember it mentioning Hey Gal's guys having a band of fresh recruits being raised without veterans mixed in often. White Mountain being a notable exception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:12
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Ah yeah, I think I conflated the two. You might also be thinking of Pecos Bill Shafter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:One thing to note is that like modern day assaults, you would not go straight in with a bunch of infantry and try to stab the other side to death. You would want to demoralise and reduce them with artillery and musketry before breaking them with a bayonet charge (if necessary). You could also rout units without charging them either, there's more than one way to skin that cat. Also like with modern day assault rifles, a musket with a bayonet attached to it is not quite a polearm replacement. Pikes were two to three times as long, and it's amazing how much a couple of meters of extra distance between two foes does to the weaker willed one's can do to their resolve. I'm pretty sure that within our id is a complex formula that goes something like "if distance to $foe = [time{with the next step he could jump to strangle me} < time{drop my $weapon, turn and run}] then drop my $weapon turn and run". Baron Porkface posted:Why did the Germans win the Battle of France? Because the Dunkirk stronghold didn't surrender and due to a glitch in scenario conditions Germans denied Allied player all victory points for France. Yes I'm ludicrously calling the 1944 battle also Battle of France, so sue me!
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:40
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Also like with modern day assault rifles, a musket with a bayonet attached to it is not quite a polearm replacement. Pikes were two to three times as long edit: so I'm reading an article about letters someone found addressed to soldiers in one of Tilly's regiments in 1625. I need to write the author of that article because I need scans of these letters, but look at this:  "Designations of kinship don't always echo the real relationship. "Brother" is widely used as a friendly form of address, as well as "brother in law" and "godfather," and a girl can also call her boyfriend "dear brother," while for one townsman the cavalrymen who were quartered on him are his "dear sons."" It wasn't always a horrible life. HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:One thing to note is that like modern day assaults, you would not go straight in with a bunch of infantry and try to stab the other side to death. You would want to demoralise and reduce them with artillery and musketry before breaking them with a bayonet charge (if necessary). You could also rout units without charging them either, there's more than one way to skin that cat. Contrary to popular impressions, the Jacobites at Culloden mostly did have muskets. Over two thousand were recovered from the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Thanks to that PYF fun historical facts thread, I just read about the Mongol invasion of Khwarezmia (modern day Iran and some other bits that I thought were historically Mongolian.) My first question is: why were the Mongols so effective? Because they steamroll through Khwarezmia, taking the cities one after another. Second question: how were Mongol armies composed? I get all of my knowledge from video games here, particularly Medieval 2 total war. ( I know,  ) In it, they use poo poo-tons of Horse archers, backed up by horsemen with lances and spears.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Contrary to popular impressions, the Jacobites at Culloden mostly did have muskets. Over two thousand were recovered from the battlefield. Huh, interesting. I wonder if the whole 'Highland Charge' thing actually stands up to scrutiny then. We need another Jon Parshall to take a look and dissect the myths of the battle! Also everyone should watch this awesome film about Culloden from the 60's, its basically a re-enactment of the battle as if there was a BBC film crew was recording it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9KaE2CAkk4Q
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
I was looking at some 16th century stuff (instead of doing my coursework  ) and I started thinking it'd be pretty neat if we still illustrated historical and legendary scenes with the characters portrayed in modern dress and equipment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:for one townsman the cavalrymen who were quartered on him are his "dear sons."" This intriques me. I gather that most people didn't want soldiers quartered on them for very good reasons, but there must have been individual cases where the soldiers made an effort to not shoot pistols out of their hosts windows after 10pm when quartered in friendly towns. Do you know know if there were any cases of that on a larger scale, units as a group subverting the norm on behaviour for one reason or another?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Now I kind of want to see a reenactment cav charge using rascals. Search for Black Friday videos on YouTube.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Waci posted:This intriques me. I gather that most people didn't want soldiers quartered on them for very good reasons, but there must have been individual cases where the soldiers made an effort to not shoot pistols out of their hosts windows after 10pm when quartered in friendly towns. Do you know know if there were any cases of that on a larger scale, units as a group subverting the norm on behaviour for one reason or another?  And when you think of all the steps each letter took to get from that city to Regiment Schoemberg in the service of General Tilly, you have to think that these people really wanted to remain in touch. "OK, we're leaving now, but you've got the name of our colonel, right? If you find someone military who looks like he's riding north, give him your letter and tell him the regiment..." HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 22:10 on Nov 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:they usually did not, the other major exception is the saxons at breitenfeld, who suuuuuucked Were they new soldiers? I think it's just a case of good soldiers in a solid formation won't generally break. Thin lines in the Napoleonic Wars break more often, because the line is weaker, but loses out in shooting. So you can rely on better soldiers to deploy in thinner lines. I also don't imagine cavalry or artillery were as much of a threat to an individual soldier in the Thirty Years War, both are scary.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Hazzard posted:Were they new soldiers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Huh, interesting. I wonder if the whole 'Highland Charge' thing actually stands up to scrutiny then. Most of these national specialities are inflated by nationalistic historians cf. Hakkapeliitat, Minutemen etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I was looking at some 16th century stuff (instead of doing my coursework You should watch Our World War, which is a WW1 dramatization shot in an ultra modern style, complete with shaky cam. It's quite good.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:47
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Our World War has chaps in period dress, I'm thinking more like BBC's Sherlock. Which is, I suppose, already an example of the thing I want.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Our World War has chaps in period dress, I'm thinking more like BBC's Sherlock.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
Hey, you hit the nail on the head. As embarrassing as it is to admit, I really enjoyed Romeo + Juliet way back when.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Hey, you hit the nail on the head. As embarrassing as it is to admit, I really enjoyed Romeo + Juliet way back when. looking for richard richard iii (ian mcclellan) edward ii (1991) hamlet, with ethan hawke
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:Not quite, it's re-set in the modern day, it's not presented as though the 19th century was exactly like the modern day. What you want sounds more like Shakespeare plays set in the modern time, Julius Caesar where they're Vietnam War generals or something When I was in middle school, we took a field trip to a performance of Julius Caesar set in modern times. They kept the period location references by making it a fictional modern dystopia where Caesar was a baritone black guy in a suit and the battle scenes had guys shooting each other in black armor and tactical gear. They had some really awesome SPQR banners for set dressing. Ralph Fiennes also did an adaptation of Coriolanus in 2011 that takes place during a modern war. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsYrGIQnmxo
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:07
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:may i interest you in Wasn't Mel Gibson in a Hamlet movie? E: yep sure was: https://youtu.be/ei0fnP9s0KA
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
I saw Patrick Stewart in a production of Macbeth set in an Eastern Bloc-type dictatorship. It was as good as you'd expect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 08:41 |
|
|
Siivola posted:Hey, you hit the nail on the head. As embarrassing as it is to admit, I really enjoyed Romeo + Juliet way back when. You would love the Ralph Fiennes take on Coriolanus then. It's pretty good in general, and it's exactly that shakespear set in modern settings thing you're looking for.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2015 23:17
|
|