The Spanish Tercios were widely regarded as one of the most elite military forces in Europe from the early 16th century into the mid 17th century
The Spanish Tercios stood out for their exceptional professionalism at a time when many European armies still relied on temporary levies or unreliable mercenaries. Their soldiers were long-serving veterans, trained in strict discipline and drilled regularly, which gave them cohesion and reliability in battle.
The Spanish Tercios used a smart, flexible way of fighting that mixed different types of soldiers into one cohesive unit. At the center were pikemen, who formed a strong defensive block against cavalry, while soldiers with firearms spread out around them to shoot, pressure, and weaken the enemy. This setup let them adjust during battle—holding their ground when needed or pushing forward in a controlled way—so they were both tough to break and dangerous on the attack.
maybe I should replay Pike and Shot again
>>65116025>40 dollars what the fuck
>>65116033you're supposed to buy it on sale, obscure strategy games tend to be expensive
ok
I still don't understand how these things actually worked. did the gunners on the sides line up to shoot and then just run and hide on the other side of the formation when enemies got too close? also if you line the gunners up to get more volume of fire you end up with unwieldy wings which don't seem to match illustrations of how they were deployed. did they really only have like 20 guys per rank shooting with slow ass counter march?
>>65115883>>65115887>>65115901Ack!!!
>>65115883Should be noted that Tercios were fairly complex military formations and maneuvering them in combat took a lot of skill and discipline.
>>65116456Lmao
If they were so elie why didn't other European empires copy them?
>>65116456>Le Grand CondéUnderstandable why they lost.
>>65116621Too complex to execute right.
>>65116647Faaaag
>>65116621They did copy the basic principle (pike and shot with square formations. The spanish just did it better - more professional troops and organization, mostly.
>>65116621Stacking pike, shot, and shields like that made it awkward to use. Most nations liked to keep each type separate for more flexibility.
>>65116621They did
Nobody really knows what the arquebusiers did upon contact. There are no contemporary explanations. Any explanation you see is made up and usually full of big obvious holes.
>>65115883Only really the Tercios which hailed directly from Spain were seen as "elite". Due to the nature of the Spanish Empire, it did recruit Tercios from all over Europe, which varied in quality. >>65115901It should also be noted that the internal organisation of the Tercios developed over the centuries. In the 1630s many innovations from the dutch and swedes were incorporated to improve the effectiveness of the musketeers for example. The number of pikemen also decreased drastically - although not as much as in dutch and swedish armies. >>65116248Depends on the time period of the Tercio you are looking at. They were formally established in 1534 (although ppike & shot existed already many decades earlier in practice) and formally replaced in 1704 with the regimental system. What OP failed to emphasize is the internal organisation of a Tercio. The fact that the organisation and hierarchy of its officers (who enjoyed a much a standarised education) was standardized and codified made the difference - not that they were a pike & shot formation. This professionalism of its officer corps (ideally) trickled down to the common soldiers in the form of more thorough drills. As to how those formations actually fought: in its earliest forms the gunners were deployed on the sides of the pike square as "sleeves" and employed countermarch to create a steady fire (those sleeves could sourround the entire pike square as well). Here it was important that the number of ranks did not exceed the lenght that the pike could cover - in practice this meant 3 to 4 men. By the 1590s another consideration was the square vs the rectangle - the former was chosen on ground that favored no one or disfavored the spanish, as the square would allow for equal coverage. The latter was chosen when the ground favored the spanish as here the rectangle allowed for a wider frontage and thus more shot. Loose swarms of relatively independent gunners might be deployed in the front as well.1/2
With time the number of gunners increased and the number of pikemen decreased, which made it impossible that every gunner was protected by a pike. Thus hollow formations became increasingly common to provide safe refuge for the "excess" gunners. Here it was critical that corridors for the gunners remained open in the pike formation so that a safe retreat was possible. Another innovation was taken from the swedes in the form of detatched musketeers who were to support cavalry attacks or which were independantly deployed of the pike formations. Still spanish, imperial german and french (I think) armies kept a relatively large number of pikemen in comparison to the dutch and swedes. It should also be noted that gunners throughout the 16th and 17th century were considered to be light infantry and thus expected to fall back or flee when threatened with a melee. Holding and defending ground whas the duty of the pikemen.2/2>>65116621They did. Due to the nature of the Spanish Empire it held territories all over Europe and influenced many more states.>>65116456The french and spanish armies at Rocrio weren't that different. Both armies utalised composite formations of lines and squares as was common in this time period (sometimes called the German System as it was developed by german and spanish generals during the 30 Years War to combat the swedish formations). The french simply managed their reserves better and won the cavalry battle. This enabled the french to drive of the spanish artillery. This only left the spanish infantry, which were simply shot to pieces by french and captured spanish cannons - they still repulsed a number of french cavalry and infantry attacks. Pic rel is the deployment of said battle: spanish on top and french on the bottom (no joke intended mon ami d'homosexualle)
>>65117189>in practice this meant 3 to 4 menso that's only 8 shots with shit early firearm accuracy at most every 30 seconds at best. wouldn't that little firepower basically be ignorable at a tactical level?
>>65117724No, it forces your unit into not being as offensive as it otherwise would be. If everyone has to worry about some faggot popping out and blasting him with a gun out of nowhere then they won't be so gung-ho to fling themselves into combat. imagine being stuck in a static formation while guys get to take free shots at you close range. its not like the gunners disappeared when close combat began, they were still in the formation shooting people from like 10 feet away
Chat GPT OP
>>65117724How do you arrive at this number? Take pic rel for example: here the sleeve of musketeers that is parallel to the front of the pikemen consists of 3 ranks of 33 men. If only ever the first rank would fire, then here it would be 33 shot ~ 30 seconds. In practice however the ranks would rotate via different methods of counter/contramarch and non-engaged gunners could also be detatched to the front if was seen fit. And there were numerous ways of arranging a pike & shot formations. Have a look at "A discourse of military discipline devided into three boockes, declaringe the partes and sufficiencie ordained in a private souldier, and in each officer; servinge in the infantery, till the election and office of the captaine generall; and the laste booke treatinge of fire-wourckes of rare executiones by sea and lande, as alsoe of firtifasions" written by Garret Barry in 1634. See: https://digitalcollections.folger.edu/bib161818-154489
Ay caramba Hanish Hercios
>>65118565>consists of 3 ranks of 33 men. If only ever the first rank would fire, then here it would be 33 shot ~ 30 seconds. In practice however the ranks would rotate via different methods of counter/contramarch3 ranks can just fire over the head with salvos when forward ranks dive and then all reload.
>>65118448It really is but this is now a Pike and Shot thread.
Spanish people in them days were very stabby people, not unlike Samurai. They'd duel at the drop of a hat and kill peasants over insults. I recall a story of a cart blocking a noblewoman's carriage so she took out a pistol and shot the driver "to which he had no recourse but to die"
>>65116456>The Spanish got out-cav'd and relentlessly pummeled by artillery >They were still so disciplined and unbreakable that they were given surrender terms equivalent to a besieged castleThis isn't the own you think it is.
>>65119124>tercio counters cava...ACK!
