Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 165
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Vinyadan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by gkathellar View Post
    Is that for African or Indian elephants?
    Is it a European swallow or an African swallow?

    I don't know if the Highland charge fits the bill for dual wielding.

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Clistenes's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiero View Post
    I thought the Immortals were armed with spear-and-bow, just like the regular Sparabara?
    Contemporary art shows them armed with bow, spear, shield and sword. They probably didn't carry both all the time, but they probably were supposed to at least be able to use both when needed...

    Being an elite unit, they probably had servants and beasts of burden to carry the equiptment they weren't using at the moment...

    Spoiler
    Show





    Also, I think at the time of Marathon the favourite Persian tactic was to have a line of shield and spear soldiers protect several lines of archers, so it would make sense to train an elite unit to be able to use both weapons and fill the gaps when needed...

    Ottoman Janissaries were elite infantry soldiers trained in the use of sword, axe, polearm, arquebuss and bow.

    XVI century's Spanish arquebussiers were expected to be able to switch to shield and sword when required too.

    Almogavar skirmishers were armed with javelins and short swords, and were expected to use both every time...
    Last edited by Clistenes; 2018-10-17 at 04:18 PM.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Earth and/or not-Earth
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by gkathellar View Post
    Is that for African or Indian elephants?
    Both, I think. Most of the sources I based that on didn't specify which kind they were discussing, and the source that specifically discussed Indian elephants gave a higher amount than the one that specifically mentioned African elephants.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by InvisibleBison View Post
    Both, I think. Most of the sources I based that on didn't specify which kind they were discussing, and the source that specifically discussed Indian elephants gave a higher amount than the one that specifically mentioned African elephants.
    What kinda of sources? You don't really tame and keep the savannah elephant (it's just too difficult). The north african forest elephant was a fair bit smaller (than the Indian and savannah version) and used closer to the mediterranean (they also ran out). I'd wager the majority of war elephants would be of the Indian variety. Even some of the Successors got Indian elepahnts, bought and gifted.


    Some pictures of what English writers were thinking about in a pike/bowman can be found here: https://leatherworkingreverendsmusin...ble-armed-man/
    Apparently there's a "device" connecting the bow and pike, that was actually news to me.

    Spoiler
    Show


    There have been examples of trying to combine the musket and pike too, with the pike functioning as a musket rest.

    None of these caught on. Not even the idea that musketeers could use their rests to create spanish riders to protect from cavalry. Usually it seems it foundered on the men getting rid of said pieces while marching (as they did with armour and pikes even).

    I mention this to give some insight into the problem of kitchensinking infantry.
    Last edited by snowblizz; 2018-10-18 at 03:39 AM.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by snowblizz View Post
    Some pictures of what English writers were thinking about in a pike/bowman can be found here: https://leatherworkingreverendsmusin...ble-armed-man/
    Apparently there's a "device" connecting the bow and pike, that was actually news to me.

    Spoiler
    Show


    There have been examples of trying to combine the musket and pike too, with the pike functioning as a musket rest.
    That reminds me of the Renaissance era French and Italian duelling daggers which had a built in flintlock. I didn't mention them before as they weren't typically found on the battlefield:

    Spoiler: Duelling daggers
    Show



    I have a replica in the same style of the second dagger. In my opinion, after it had been fired, it would be pretty much used exclusively for off hand parrying or stabbing as the weight isn't well distributed and the handling isn't great.


    The axe flintlock that's been on this thread before was apparently used for naval boarding actions:
    Spoiler: Axe Flintlock
    Show

  6. - Top - End - #36
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    This has probably been asked before, but could I ask what, in your opinion/s, are the best way to beat a Roman phalanx and/or testudo?

    As well, on rougher/muddier terrain which is often used to defeat certain strategies, what units or formations are good?

    (Made an account just to ask!)
    Last edited by PixelKirby; 2018-10-18 at 07:14 AM.

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Aneurin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Nottingham, UK

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by PixelKirby View Post
    This has probably been asked before, but could I ask what, in your opinion/s, are the best way to beat a Roman phalanx and/or testudo?

    As well, on rougher/muddier terrain which is often used to defeat certain strategies, what units or formations are good?

    (Made an account just to ask!)
    For the phalanx, the traditional approach as I understand it is either you push them up against another phalanx (ideally, one larger, better trained, better equipped and more veteran) and wait until one side breaks. Meanwhile you try to push skirmishers around the flanks and the rear of the formation to make whoever's fighting in it get nervous and, if at all possibly, start taking fire where their shields can't protect them without giving up their cohesion.

    Alternatively, you could try to push past the spear points and stay too close for the spears to be used effectively - but that doesn't work well against deep formations which is probably why phalanxes were deep formations whenever possible.

    A general would want to wear down an enemy phalanx before engaging it - the tireder the enemy phalanx is, the less likely it is to hold up in the shoving match of phalanx combat. Anything that can disrupt the phalanx is also good, though you'd have to be quick on your toes to exploit a break in ranks before it can close back up. A phalanx will tend to hold out as long as its nerve does - so anything that can undermine that is wonderful, so that covers your pre-battle taunting, picking off officers, throwing pots of hornets and snakes at them, and chasing off supporting troops as well as a lot of pre-battle rumour mongering, and keeping them awake all night with raids and alarms. But, then, that's really the goal in every battle - defeat the enemy before they ever take to the field.


    The testudo is much easier to beat, because it isn't really a fighting formation. I mean, look at it. How do you fight like that? When half the soldiers are busy holding a shield over everyone's head and trying not to push anyone else out of line? It's excellent protection from missile fire, no doubt, which is why it was used in sieges, but if someone gets pulled out of position, it's got to be really difficult to get another shield in position to cover where they were. Hit them with axemen and the testudo is in trouble, as the axemen just use their axes to drag the shields out and then their friend kills its holder.

    Alternatively, hit it with heavy weapons - ballista and similar weapons will give whoever's inside a very bad time and wear them down with heavy impacts, even if it doesn't breach the formation. By the time the testudo breaks into a more combat-capable formation everyone in it will (hopefully) be exhausted and no use in a fight.
    Amazing Banshee avatar by Strawberries. Many, many thanks.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by PixelKirby View Post
    This has probably been asked before, but could I ask what, in your opinion/s, are the best way to beat a Roman phalanx and/or testudo?

    As well, on rougher/muddier terrain which is often used to defeat certain strategies, what units or formations are good?

    (Made an account just to ask!)
    Thatís a vaste and huge question, even more difficult to answer because of the scale of time involved.

    One thing not to forget is that Rome was particulary efficient in making allies, the most striking example would be Caesar, with his multiple gallic friends like Diviciacos and the german mercenaries. Rome was able to win a lot of ground dividing to conquer.

    Rome lost a few battles but was able to wage war nevertheless. Defeating a legion, even an army, could draw a fierce response from the Urbs, and starting a long term campaign. Here the Equipment and training of the legion come in full effect. The fastness of construction of their fortifications would be a huge advantage.

    With that in mind, there is a lot to consider. The most obvious battles would be of course those won by Hannibal. Cannae is still the textbook exemple of outmaneuvring a fixed foe. If you can pin the huge mass of men, you can move on the flanks or on the rear and it is one way to dispose of the legion in ranged battle.

    The battle of Pharsale (and the civil war in general) may offer another good example. Caesar would also use is infantry to fix the adversary and win by using some troops on the flank.

    Trasimene is an ambush of amazing scale. Some of the worst defeat of the legion would come this way. A marching Roman army is far less efficient. The battle of the Teutoburg forest may be the most striking example.

    Iím more foggy about that but the wars between the Romans and the Parthians and the Seleucides may offer you some insight about the use of cavalry and space against a legion.

    Also welcome!

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Pixie in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Thanks to both of you, Iíll be sure to look into mentioned battles.

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by PixelKirby View Post
    This has probably been asked before, but could I ask what, in your opinion/s, are the best way to beat a Roman phalanx and/or testudo?

    As well, on rougher/muddier terrain which is often used to defeat certain strategies, what units or formations are good?

    (Made an account just to ask!)
    The Roman phalanx was defeated repeatedly by the fast-moving Celts and Samnites, which is what led to the adoption of the more flexible manipular system.

    The testudo is a specific tactic to defend against missiles, it's not very useful outside a handful of situations, like attacking a gate.

    Don't be mislead into believing the Romans did everything with the legions alone, they didn't. They were always supposed by their allies, the socii, who made up half of their force. Some readings of the accounts of battles suggest the allies may even have done most of the fighting, though that's dubious.
    Last edited by Kiero; 2018-10-18 at 10:01 AM.
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  11. - Top - End - #41
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Epimethee View Post
    Iím more foggy about that but the wars between the Romans and the Parthians and the Seleucides may offer you some insight about the use of cavalry and space against a legion.
    Traditionally the Romans had issues when facing up against mobile, cavalry heavy armies, particularly those with heavy draw composite bows like the Parthians as they could penetrate Roman shields. If I recall correctly, Parthians basically shot up Roman phalanxes at will until the Roman cavalry auxiliaries chased them off and even then the Roman cavalry got shot up via Parthian archery techniques.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Older guns seem to have often had polygonal barrels, rather than round ones. Why is that and why did it stop? It looks really nice...

    I'm not talking about rifling.



  13. - Top - End - #43
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by The Jack View Post
    Older guns seem to have often had polygonal barrels, rather than round ones. Why is that and why did it stop? It looks really nice...
    Mechanical stresses from containing the controlled explosion of the charge means that the barrel needs to be as strong as possible. However making the biggest strongest shape possible has to be balanced against weapon weight and cost (the more material in the barrel, the more expensive the weapon).

    A cylinder is the most efficient shape possible (even thickness of the barrel to contain the charge going off), but manufacturing techniques hadn't caught up to make perfectly even and symmetrical barrels - uneven barrels tended to fracture along stress points which is bad for the weapon user/crews if that happened in combat or worse, during firing.

    The next optimal shape in terms of material usage/strength gained is a hexagon. It's also very easy to make, since you can hammer a barrel against a flat surface quite easily or otherwise cast it as such. The hexagon is also a very strong geometric shape and is found very commonly in nature:

    Spoiler: Hexagons in nature
    Show


    Whether weapon makers came across the hexagon via their own processes, took inspiration from nature, or simply liked the look, is up for debate.

    Octagons are also popular as they retain most of the strength/material efficiency of a hexagon, but now also give you more surface area to fit external components to (like the foresight) or to ensure the fit of the barrel to the rest of the receiver/stock/weapon.

    As manufacturing techniques improved (either from improved technology, improved availability or better economics eg Colt upgrading their manufacturing line), manufacturers could start cutting back on costs without compromising weapon performance/safety and started making circular barrels again.
    Last edited by Brother Oni; 2018-10-19 at 02:03 AM.

  14. - Top - End - #44
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Oni View Post
    Traditionally the Romans had issues when facing up against mobile, cavalry heavy armies, particularly those with heavy draw composite bows like the Parthians as they could penetrate Roman shields. If I recall correctly, Parthians basically shot up Roman phalanxes at will until the Roman cavalry auxiliaries chased them off and even then the Roman cavalry got shot up via Parthian archery techniques.
    Not an interpretation of the battle of Carrhae I recognise. The Parthians drove off the Roman cavalry and their horsearchers forced the Roman infantry to stay on station, shields ready, all day long. The arrows were galling, rather than deadly, for the most part. Then their cataphracts were able to harass and ride down the exhausted legionaries when they tried to make for a village to hole up.
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Gnoman's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Toledo, Ohio
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    There are many ways to defeat a phalanx, but they all fall into two categories.



    The first category is simply "a better phalanx", which can take multiple forms. Some classical examples include making the phalanx larger, making it smaller, providing longer spears, or providing lots and lots of javelins to soften up the enemy before the clash.


    The second category centers on exploiting the phalanx's great weakness - it is an inflexible formation with very limited tactical mobility. This also takes many, many forms. Alexander compensated by supplementing his phalanxes with extremely good cavalry - he'd pin down the enemy with his own phalanxes, then use his cavalry to outflank them. Other classical solutions were artillery bombardment (the cumbersome nature of early catapults and ballista made their use as field artillery difficult, but they were used that way at times), foot skirmishers using sling and javelin, light harassment cavalry, or the Roman legion (which divided the phalanx into a lot of miniature phalanxes that were trained for independent maneuver). Use of terrain also helped a great deal - the phalanx worked best on mostly-flat ground, so luring (or forcing) the phalanx to fight on very uneven terrain greatly hurt the cohesion that was central to the phalanx's power.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Alexander's phalanx was a good deal more flexible than that of his Successors. His father trained a professional force who could be mobilised as heavy infantry or skirmishers as required. He also had lots of allied troops able to fill other roles besides cavalry, like his Thracian light infantry (particularly the likes of the Agrianians).
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  17. - Top - End - #47
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiero View Post
    Not an interpretation of the battle of Carrhae I recognise. The Parthians drove off the Roman cavalry and their horsearchers forced the Roman infantry to stay on station, shields ready, all day long. The arrows were galling, rather than deadly, for the most part. Then their cataphracts were able to harass and ride down the exhausted legionaries when they tried to make for a village to hole up.
    I stand corrected - my knowledge of Roman warfare is limited.

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Location
    Earth and/or not-Earth
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by snowblizz View Post
    What kinda of sources? You don't really tame and keep the savannah elephant (it's just too difficult). The north african forest elephant was a fair bit smaller (than the Indian and savannah version) and used closer to the mediterranean (they also ran out). I'd wager the majority of war elephants would be of the Indian variety. Even some of the Successors got Indian elepahnts, bought and gifted.
    I was mostly looking at zoo websites, not anything historical. That being said, I'd be surprised if historical war elephants didn't fall into the range of food estimates I mentioned, given how broad it was.

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Brother Oni View Post
    I stand corrected - my knowledge of Roman warfare is limited.
    Not to worry, it's one of those frequently remembered wrongly as "horse archers beat legions in straight fight", when the reality was very different. The Surenas who led the Parthians had also prepared for a very long archery segment, bringing up lots of extra arrows ahead of the battle. Under normal circumstances, after exhausting their ammo, the Parthians would have retreated and prepared for the next battle, slowly bleeding the Romans while drawing them ever further from their supply depots. All the while constantly raiding those supply lines and picking off stragglers.
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    Incanur's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, New Mexico

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Randuir View Post
    Something I've seen pop up in fantasy literature now and again is the concept of 'sword-and-bows', a type of infantry that would be trained in both a melee weapon and a ranged weapon. I know the Roman legionaries used javelins as ranged weapons, but I'm wondering if there was any established military doctrine that used troops equally proficient at a main ranged weapon (like a bow or crossbow) and a melee weapon.
    As other folks have mentioned, this was most common with cavalry. For centuries, from the Middle East to Japan, elite mounted warriors equipped themselves with bows, swords, armor, maces, and sometimes even two-handed weapons (including the flail in Korea).

    Infantry troops with ranged weapons were almost always supposed to have some ability to engage in melee combat, but this could be rather limited. Archers & similar rarely wore the armor needed to stand up to well-equipped heavy infantry, though in certain cases they wore considerable armor. Crossbowers in Tang China resorted to close combat according to a Song-era manual. As noted by others, English archers effectively fought up close in multiple battles.

    However, it's fundamentally challenging to equip archers, crossbowers, etc. with enough armor & with a large melee weapon. Without those two elements, they can't be too close to dedicated heavy infantry. English archers did at least have access to two-handed weapons, sometimes scavenged from vanquished foes & sometimes perhaps somehow carried by the archers. English archers wore varying amounts of armor, with the fabric jack plus steel cap perhaps being the most common kit.

    A 1562 manual by Henry Barrett assigns archers "a maule of leade with a pyke of five inches longe, well stieled, sett in a staff of fyve foote of lengthe with a hooke at his gyrdell to take of and mayntayne the fighte as oure elders have donn, with handye stroaks." Carrying a 5.5+ft polearm at one's belt seems awkward, but I guess they managed.

    In theory, you could equip infantry with bows they carried on their sides in cases/holsters as well as staff weapons they carried in their hands. Qing armies sometimes equipped soldiers with both guns & bows in this fashion. I don't know of any historical example of this with melee weapons, but it should work.

    My in own fantasy setting, the best archers use big-ear (Manchu-style) bows plus stakes that double as spears when needed.
    Last edited by Incanur; 2018-10-18 at 10:11 PM.
    Out of doubt, out of dark to the day's rising
    I came singing in the sun, sword unsheathing.
    To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking:
    Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Another historical archer-swordsman were the Rajputs, before they adopted the musket/rifle.
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Incanur View Post
    As other folks have mentioned, this was most common with cavalry. For centuries, from the Middle East to Japan, elite mounted warriors equipped themselves with bows, swords, armor, maces, and sometimes even two-handed weapons (including the flail in Korea).
    I think this might be misleading for japan at least.

    I don't know about the rest, but in japan, the samurai fuedal system had more in common with the western system than not... meaning lower ranking samurai would be training for everything they'd use in war, for all the days they weren't at war, and unlike most european knights, thought of the bow as a weaponof war for the elite, at least for a time.

    During this period, they were crazy. There's that pre-mongol era where an honourable fight would be an archery starting round followed by a sword fight, and then there's the post mongol era where the bow was still primary and the sword was secondary... and few used polearms on horseback, the absolute madmen. The swords of this era are specialised for horseback use, but it's not really the best use of a horse to go in close like that, most of the time. You'd lose, or risk the horse too much, unless your enemy was routing, very ill equiped, or an honourable samurai who's into dueling. You'd very much be a horse archer first and another kind of cavalry in a distant second.

    You get to the sengoku period and the world becomes normal again; Polearms beat out the bow on horseback, the bow becomes a predominantly foot weapon, guns all round. You can probably chalk this up to larger armies and better armour. But mounted archery becomes a hunting/sport thing with an honourable past, and in war it's largely obsolete. So whilst the samurai still practice mounted archery, it's more for fun/because they've got too much free time on their hands.

    European knights were practiced with bows/crossbows for mostly sport/hunting, and mostly didn't use those weapons on the battlefield (there's exceptions) Again, they had one job; their roll in society was to fight, and learn all the weapons. Peacetime Life was a series of martial arts lessons.
    Last edited by The Jack; 2018-10-19 at 06:07 AM.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    About sword and bow, i find interesting how the focus here is on tactical concepts. I agree with most of them but i think the way a warrior was understood by a society is also relevant.

    Thatís again a huge subject as societies havť obviously specific ideologies. They tend to put an emphasis in sources upon one kind of combat or warriors, like the greeks who made their skirmishers more or less disapear in their writtings.
    Also as sword was the first tool invented only for war, it is as much a mark of status as a weapon.

    In this sense, the fact that the sword is dependant of a huge techological frame, the invention of metalurgy, may also be interesting to think about how war became a specific activity and how it is entangled with the societies that produce it. But thatís another discussion !

    One thing is important to watch because it is as much true as problematic is that the more complex a society grow, the more likely it is to have a specialization in its forces.
    Roughly speaking tribals warriors were expected to fulfill more fighting roles than the fighters of a Roman legion. (And even then the legion is original in the way they used the pilum to resolve this problem between long and close range.)

    The fact that horses help perform more tasks is relevant and related but only in a way. In some documented cases in northern america some people would revert to nomadism because the horse would give them an incentive in war and commerce.

    But the presence of horse would not lead automatically to polyvalent forces. Parthians for example had heavy and light cavalry intended to fight together an fullfiling specifics roles on the battlefield. Mongols on the other Hand were expected to be able to fight alone in some cases and to fill more than one role in the battlefield or during the course of a campaign. As much as the forces would specialize through the rise of mongol empire, the Core of tribes in the AltaÔ would still more or less practice bows and close combat.

    The case of the chariot of war is in this sense interesting in martial societies like acheans or celts : the Heavy warriors were expected to fight at close range but also to give support fire. The fighting unit in this case would be the chariot itself and the driver would often be instrumental in the fight.

    Of course war chariots would only made for a fraction of the forces. And the fighter would often fight on foot. Also the war Leaders would use a significant part of the local ressources, as numerous tumbs across Europe made it clear.
    But still the warrior was expected to fulfill every aspect of the Art of war.

    Note that this concepts can live at the same time than more complex armies. In the Heike monogatari, the archetypal death of a samouraÔ is described more or less always in the same way: the warrior use all his arrows then a long sword Till it break and then a long knife or close combat weapon. Then he die.

    So again, as much as you need to choose the actual weapon to use in a fight, what equipment you are trained to use is related to cultural considerations about the role of Warriors.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Ogre in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bristol, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Chariots were primarily intended as "battle taxis", not as precursor to cavalry. The noble would ride to the fight, dismount and fight, then get back on his vehicle to flee or move to the next crisis point.
    Wushu Open Reloaded
    Actual Play: The Shadow of the Sun (Acrozatarim's WFRP campaign) as Pawel Hals and Mass: the Effecting - Transcendence as Russell Ortiz.
    Now running: Tyche's Favourites, a historical ACKS campaign set around Massalia 300BC.
    In Sanity We Trust Productions - our podcasting site where you can hear our dulcet tones, updated almost every week.

  25. - Top - End - #55
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by The Jack View Post
    You get to the sengoku period and the world becomes normal again; Polearms beat out the bow on horseback, the bow becomes a predominantly foot weapon, guns all round. You can probably chalk this up to larger armies and better armour.
    Initially matchlocks were only adopted en-masse by Oda Nobunaga, but it wasn't really until the Battle of Nagashino where Oda used recognisably modern firearms tactics (wooden stockades for protection and an early version of countermarching) to comprehensively defeat the Takeda cavalry that cemented the place of firearms in Japanese warfare.

    It's only after Nagashino that Nanban gusoku (western style metal cuirass) began becoming popular (they were originally regarded as a curiosity sold by the Portuguese and other Western traders). Tameshi gusoku (Nanban gusoku sold with a pistol dent intact as evidence of its proofing) also started appearing about then, so better armour technically post-dated the mass adoption of firearms.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    you're confusing best with better. Even without the adoption of nanban armours the japanese were moving towards simpler steel munition armours and away from the more complicated armours of earlier wars. Ashigaru were decently armoured and so horse archery in war likely turned into a risky indulgence.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Dwarf in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    May 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiero View Post
    Chariots were primarily intended as "battle taxis", not as precursor to cavalry. The noble would ride to the fight, dismount and fight, then get back on his vehicle to flee or move to the next crisis point.
    Yes and no, depend of what you call cavalry as a lot of mounted fighters would actually often dismount to fight like the chasseur ŗ cheval of the imperial guard or the North american cavalry of the XIX century.

    Also i think the named drivers in greek mythology like Iolaos, the driver of Herakles, show how they were intended to take an active part in battle.
    The same could be said of Laeg, the driver of Cuchulainn.

    I agree and said that the fighter was mostly intended to fight on foot but the chariot was also a weapon platform where javelin and bows were often used. And this in my opinion is tied with the warrior ideology.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Barbarian in the Playground
    Join Date
    Feb 2012

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by Incanur View Post
    However, it's fundamentally challenging to equip archers, crossbowers, etc. with enough armor & with a large melee weapon. Without those two elements, they can't be too close to dedicated heavy infantry. English archers did at least have access to two-handed weapons, sometimes scavenged from vanquished foes & sometimes perhaps somehow carried by the archers. English archers wore varying amounts of armor, with the fabric jack plus steel cap perhaps being the most common kit.
    It's probably worth noting that this was still relative though. Sutcliffe for example thought that an english archer wearing mail or a jack of plate was still much better suited for melee combat than an arquebusier or musketeer who typically wore no armor at all.

    Whether a later musketeer with no armor and a bayonet could be considered better equipped for melee than an archer wearing a jack of plate and a sword I'm still not so sure.

    One other option is that while it's hard to carry a ranged weapon and a polearm at the same time, you do sometimes see during a siege that the defenders will try to store pikes, halberds, targets, etc. near breaches or trenches where the enemy is likely to assault. The intention being that the defenders can therefore fight with their muskets first then drop them and pick up the better melee weapons as the enemy gets close.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Brother Oni's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Cippa's River Meadow
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    Quote Originally Posted by The Jack View Post
    you're confusing best with better. Even without the adoption of nanban armours the japanese were moving towards simpler steel munition armours and away from the more complicated armours of earlier wars. Ashigaru were decently armoured and so horse archery in war likely turned into a risky indulgence.
    Unless you meant pre-Heian armours, do-maru armour made from kozane (scales) was the standard armour for infantry from the 12th Century Genpei War onwards, while the o-yoroi was typically worn by cavalry. The o-yoroi was modernised slightly to become more manoeuvrable after the Mongol Invasion in the 13th Century, but it wasn't until the arrival of matchlocks with the Portuguese in 1543 that the shift from the various kozane style armours to lamellar tosei gusoku happened.
    Tosei gusoku (当世具足) literally means 'modern armour'.

    Pre-Sengoku ashigaru armour depended on the period and the clan in question - some were armoured, some weren't. The recognisable Sengoku era ashigaru armour (simple banded hara-ate torso armour, conical jingasa helmet, etc) wasn't introduced until the 15th Century, making the effectiveness of horse archery variable before the Sengoku era. From what I understand, during the Kamakura period (12th-14th Century), mounted archery practice for samurai seemed to be compulsory much like archery practice was in contemporary England.

    Basically I'm disputing your claim that the mass adoption of firearms was due to better armour, when the better armour (both tosei and nanban gusoku) was developed due to the adoption of firearms.
    Last edited by Brother Oni; 2018-10-20 at 03:44 AM.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Orc in the Playground
     
    HalflingRangerGuy

    Join Date
    Mar 2018

    Default Re: Got a Real-World Weapon, Armor or Tactics Question? Mk. XXVII

    No I didn't make that claim. I may have mentioned guns at the wrong point though.
    I'm suggesting that mounted archery declined against better armoured infantry and better armoured foot archers.
    Last edited by The Jack; 2018-10-20 at 05:24 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •