>Line up in close formation>No armor>No cover>Shoot at each otherWTF where they even thinking?! Just how goyed where the first line soldiers to just accept that?
>>18387470Damn, we hadn't had this thread in quite a while. I'm looking forward to see the same points repeated and "clever" ways brought up to improve the combat of the late 17th, 18th and most of the 19th century. My favorite one was that one Anon who wanted to establish dedicated shield bearers. Or the other Anon who wanted to spam grenades.
>>18387470To win battles or take cities, an army needs disciplined troops who can fight in formation and hold their ground. Forces made only of hit and run skirmishers are unreliable and cannot conquer or hold territory. That's why Western discipline dominated for centuries
>>18387470lmao the drummer is like the bard class in RPGs that buffs your party
>>18387470>entire era literally defined by technological and military innovations>"wtf why were they so retarded"You are the retard.
It should probably be said that those battles were often less bloody. Dicipline was everything, and most formations would often break and scatter after a couple of volleys.
>>18387470>goyed is when you show bravery in battle for your king and countryI know browns don't understand this, which is why they lose every war
>>18387470Unironically more safe than modern wars.Modern wars gives you a false sense of security thinking your safe in your trench, and then suddenly you get blown up
>>18387539>Brits were really decapitating Patriots' heads in the 1700sdisgusting
>>18387470Is it okay to shoot the "musicians"? In this case the drummer and flutist? Seems dishonorable.
>>18387539fun fact: Napoleon had an idea of cavalry carrying skirmishers across the battlefield and created units called "Voltigeurs" where 2 or 3 would jump onto the back of a horse or hang onto it while skipping along on the ground beside it, however this was discovered impractical in chaotic battlefield conditions and they quickly transformed into regular line and light infantry divisionsyou can recreate it in roblox with 3 lancers and 7 skirmishers and it works well if you stay near teammates who know how to form infantry squares when cavalry attack
>>18387470>imagine dying for elites for any reason in any time periodCouldn't be me.
>>18387470>No coverWrong.
>>18387566>Die for a rich prick that juts happened to be born to a special family and a country that throws your life away for some stupid royal squabbleWhites truly are biological cucks
>>18387597They're helping coordinate their army. No different from shooting the officer with the sword.
>>18387470>Just how goyed where [sic] the first line soldiers to just accept that?Either they were essentially slaves pressed into service and couldn’t get the group cohesion to kill their officers or they were poor and couldn’t get the group cohesion to kill their officers. Modern troops are the same.
>>18387470Desertion was punished by hanging so you had no choice. If you tried to escape they'd kill you themselves.
>>18387554It's more like a radio carrier in a platoon. And it was mostly young childs living alongside the officers to learn the job. Like an intern you would'nt except to do more difficult task.
>>18387862Desertion was quite common in a sense, actually. Soldiers would just feign death or hide behind a bush or a fold of land while the batalion pass by before reaching contact. They would hope that no one notice it in the heat of victory or that no one care in the route of a defeat.
Does anyone still play Mount & Blade Warband: Napoleonic Wars?That was great fun to fight in a line formation
>>18387566>die for kikes and worthless psychopathic faggots in power of his made up freemasonic shitholeYou are a slave with no agency of your own, that's why you masked and vaxxed.
>>18387470This is how the French charged German machine gun nests in WW1. Brightly colored and with lots of bling so the Germans won't miss their magnificence and flee in awe! Kidding, you can't miss these fuckers, shoot to kill.
>>18387713>Whites Vs BrownsLoyalty and honor to a great leader vs the literal worship of god kings.
>>18387598Yeah, Voltigeur just means equestrian vaulter at the end of the day. And they thus became the light companies of the french line infantry and the chasseur a pied.>>18387843Nice, a new meme. No the soldiers weren't slaves and the fact that they were subject to a central and codified military jurisdiction than the personal jurisdiction of a respective manoral lord/land owner was a huge step up. Soldiers on leave too were thus free fom the jurisdiction of their lords even if they were back at home. Additionally corporal punishments were codified and not given out arbitrary. Most importantly soldiers received a wage, lodging, easy garrison duty for the old heads and invalid pensions.>>18388095It depends on the army of course and the respective time periods. There were massive desertion waves during and after the War of the Spanish Succession in Prussia. In 1714 nearly 3.500 musketeers deserted which was the equivalent of three regiments. But this was an isolated peak and in the following decades the number of desertion decreased to 400 deserting individuals per year for the whole army. And this average remained consistent for the rest of the century.
>>18387539Why wouldn't dedicated shieldbearers work? Give them huge metal ones with a hole for gun barrels and put them in the front.
>>18388250Equipping a large enough portion of your infantry with heavy shields will just reduce your strategic and tactical maneuverability. They are also just single purpose soldiers who can't perform other duties. And even if you are able to deploy your shield bearers on a battlefield the enemy can just shoot them with very light field artillery like 1 or 2 pdr falconets - which would just be slightly slower to maneuver.
>>18387470cover was used when it was available thougheverbeitthe real issue is that you need dense formations to have effective communications, and be able to form a wall of bayonets to stop a cavalry attack
>>18388250Because it's costly, a complete strain on logistics, and the soldiers will most likely just ditch them to lighten their loads. Soldiers carried everything, and would even leave behind their cooking pots. You could track an army by just following all the shit they tossed to the side of the road and many peasants made money scavenging these trails for said pots and what not to resell.
>>18387470
>>18387470>>18387713>>18387843Soldiers for most of the 1700’s were professionals. Battles were low casualty and one could fully expect to survive and retire with a pension and a plot of land. They didn't just let anyone join the military, and instead of signing up for say the British army, you'd sign up for your specific town/cities regiment which was led, commanded, and outfitted by a man from said town/city. The idea of “nation” didn't exist until the Napoleonic wars.
>>18388287On seeing a Sharpe reference, I'll post the pasta. That's my style, Sir!>>18388295While the other Anon is overly negative, you are overly positive. Nearly anybody could join the european armies and many relied on some form of conscription model anyways. Those "unfit" were employed for second line or garrison duties, train/fourier duties or if they were really unfit simply not taken (a rarity). And the "man from said town/city" was a higher noble who wasn't your average joe either.
>>18388250carrying a shield thick enough to stop a musket and wide enough to cover more than just yourself would be like lugging an anvil around. Even if they were any use in battle no soldier would ever want to march with it.
When was the last time warfare was honorable? There is just a lack of honor and humanity in shooting someone with a gun, never mind using a drone or missile, versus close combat.
>>18388379Before the invention of bow and arrow, so roughly 70000 years ago.
>>18388384What about the spear
>>18388408Only if you don't throw it
>>18388408>using a long stick over getting up close with a rockreal pussy shit
Why didn't they just use shields?
>>18388423During the Napoleonic wars it was rumored that the Ottoman Turks used them.
>>18388422>Using a rock instead of fistsTrue mark of shame
>>18388423A shield able to stop a musket ball would be too heavy to be reasonably transportable while on campaign.
>>18388460Probably by some of the ottoman cavalry. Janissaries seldomly used shields by the 18th century. And in the late 1770s/80s there were reforms to modernise the ottoman military and to establish european style line infantry - but only a few of those regiments were raised (who by all accounts outperformed other ottoman troops during the Siege of Acre) before the reforms were stopped in 1806/07 by a janissary revolt.
>>18388475>using fists instead of just biting and scratching
>>18388359>>18388508Muskets fired round shots, which have very poor penetration and air resistance. Arrows at the time had better penetration than muskets. Japanese used light bamboo shields which worked. I'd imagine a few centimeter thick wooden shield would block bullets fired from afar.
>>18388967>Arrows at the time had better penetration than muskets.Complete nonsense.
>>18387470It makes more sense if you think of a musket as a gun combined with a pike rather than just a gun and also that generals the generals of the era still considered ”cold steel” (bayonet charges) to be superior to shot.>Why didn’t they wear armor then.Because armor wouldn’t have stopped shot and Hollywood gives people the impression that armies were kitted out in plate armor before this period when a lot of times they were just as defenseless as the guys in your picture. Nevertheless there were still certain people that did wear metal Cuirasses during this period and up until Napoleon’s time.
>>18387470Because the alternative was working a dead end 16 hours a day job + death by gin.
>>18388967No. The japanese quickly found out that their existing Tate were incapable if stopping arquebus fire. Thus they began to cover their shields with iron plates or thick bamboo bundles - the latter method proved so effective that the shield was done away with and just a wooden rack was used to suspend the bamboo bundles (Taketaba). But neither the standing Tate nor the Taketaba were particularly often used in field battles. Rather they were utilised as prepared positions during siegesRegardless a "few centimeters of wood" will still result in a very heavy shield. Especially when you want that shield to be relatively tall and wide and not just be the size of a buckler.
>>18389158What if they wore the shield on their backs to protect them while reloading? I saw that in a game once
>>18389414>I saw that in a game onceYeah, in Total War Medieval 2 some crossbowmen have this animation.>What if they wore the shield on their backs to protect them while reloading? Fixing a solid plank to your back severely impedes your movement and without a complex harness puts a great deal of strain on you. Do give you an idea: a bulletproof plank made out of oak wood would need to be 10 to 15 cm thick. A plank that is 170 cm tall, 60 cm wide and 10 cm thick would weigh 84 kg.
>>18387713>literally every race on earth uses some formation for open battles forcing themselves to gwt exposed to slings, arrows, javelins, etc.>whites invent firearm formations which allow them to wipe out enemy battlelines with ease>NOO YOU ARE CUUUCCKEDI guess no white colonizer wanted to fuck your grand grand grand ma eh?
>>18388541Imagine what it must have been, that lost morning long ago when the first civilization of man assembled that first formation of men at arms, their weapons risen in salute to their king, voices echoing to the sky, foot stomping the earth in their hundreds, not a swarm or a stampede but geometric, constant, no other creature on earth displaying such might, such intellect, such willpower.
