spectralent posted:

Ensign Expendable posted:

Artillery and man-portable methods of killing tanks have been around for almost as long as tanks themselves. Somehow tanks managed to deal with it.

HEY GAL posted:

as far as i can tell there's hell of dragoons in afghanistan, theory checks out

Crazycryodude posted:

1) The only (declassified) engagements they've fought have been against 3rd world insurgents who couldn't even detect them much less shoot back
2) It's a lot easier to hide a drone than a tank (at least from a Mk. I Human Eyeball), what with being much smaller and having a third dimension to play with

Fangz posted:

To clarify, I'm not saying it helped the cause of industrialisation to have giant disasters, I am saying though that if you embark on a gigantic program of industrialisation with few experts on hand then mistakes are going to be made.

The only real way to avoid those catastrophes would be to bring in foreign advice and assistance, but for obvious reasons nobody in that time particularly wanted to assist China rising to a position where it could challenge their strength. I don't think that would have been different under Chang, and Chang would have the additional problem of having to fight against rural communist sympathies every step of the way. Comparing to India isn't great, but it's hard to think of any closer comparison.

Cyrano4747 posted:

(watch that movie, it's amazing in its ridiculousness)

quote:

Admiral Togo regarded Admiral Yi as his superior. At a party held in his honor, Togo took exception to a speech comparing him to Lord Nelson and Yi Sun-sin.

"It may be proper to compare me with Nelson, but not with Korea’s Yi Sun-sin, for he has no equal." (The Imjin War, by Samuel Hawley, pg. 490)

quote:

Whatever happens, we have got

The Maxim gun, and they have not.

Polyakov posted:

lovely as it was the Luftwaffe was far from alone in just strafing roads, a not insignificant amount of bailed out allied pilots were lynched by enraged german civillians, typically condoned or actively instigated by the local nazi officials, this was in a large part because of the fighter pilots who would fly low and strafe the roads of Germany (also because of the massive bombing of the cities). Air forces were generally equally dirty as far as i know in terms of actually fighting (ignoring the luftwaffe ground forces), the only difference was in capability allowing many to kill far more, if an allied airman was found by the Luftwaffe or the Wehrmacht he was usually ok, if he was found by the Volksturm or committed members of the Nazi party he was very often in trouble, theres a quote from an American bomber crew who were shot down:

"Nobody tried very hard to do us harm… they just seemed to stare at us and we at them. The strangest odyssey began next morning, when we began to walk out of Gravensberg down the main street. We walked down the middle of the street, and the civilians on the sidewalk hurled epithets and threats at us, ‘Kaput machen!’, again and again – a frightening litany. We passed a group of nuns, and even they spat at us. We learned later that they really hated the fighter pilots because they came down and shot up anything that moved on the roads and even farm animals in the fields. Our fighter pilots generated a lot of anger and distress, and if they were shot down they were in great jeopardy – the civilians would gang up and beat them mercilessly"

unwantedplatypus posted:

So humans have ridden horses, camels, and elephants into combat, as well as occasionally using dogs. What other animals have we used for war? What are the traits which make an animal suitable for use in warfare?

Miles Vorkosigan posted:

Speaking of, in 1491 the author mentions that when Europeans showed up in North America the local's bows were actually better weapons than the settler's guns. How true is that? And for that matter, how much do we know about North American bowmaking? Were they better, worse or different than bows in Europe and Asia?

SlothfulCobra posted:

Firearms in 1492 had their issues, but it's a moot point, since native American arrows ain't got poo poo on the suits of armor that the spaniards had access to.

Comstar posted:

That sounds...wrong. Obsidian bladed swords maybe, but how good is an obsidian bladed chisel, hammer, axe, pick and shovel, even if you discount armour too?

Then again, I don't know how they cut the stones for their roads, buildings and temples. Copper tools?

lenoon posted:

I used to study stone tools before conscientious objection

I've cut up pig carcasses by hacking them to pieces with obsidian blades set in wooden hafts, and it does work very very well.

quote:

These aren't disposable tools for an hour or two of fighting, but can stand up to pretty significant punishment.

Slim Jim Pickens posted:

There was Cajamarca, but that was more of a one-sided ambush of Atahualpa and some unarmed guards.

Rodrigo Diaz posted:

I also would be interested to see a really thorough study of edge damage on steel and obsidian. The article saying one of their tools lasted a whole hour(!) on softwood, which doesn't fill me with confidence.

SlothfulCobra posted:

Has there ever been a conclusive answer to "how much damage will make the enemy surrender?"

aphid_licker posted:

All your population being fed by the people you are at war would be a bit embarrassing for a government. Weird situation to imagine. "Here's your can of SPAM, now go out there and Kamikaze those fuckers"

xthetenth posted:

Apparently at least one lurked the section WoT forums where Ensign, a decent number of other cool dudes (and also I) did a bunch of posting about tanks, I saw one dev mention it. I also got a bit of iconoclastic vibe from it in a few other places.

OwlFancier posted:

Yi Sung Sin (can't loving spell his name)

my dad posted:

How often do you run into the Soviet or Allied equivalent of wehraboos? Like, people who are so incredibly into a myth about some Soviet tank's/ship's/weapon's quality that they go frothing at the mouth at the mere mention of one of its flaws?

HEY GAL posted:

wut

are they "bad" or "ijn bad"

P-Mack posted:

While we're at it, if anyone is secretly a Donghak rebellion expert please speak up.