Ancient weapons made the world whole lot interesting until guns happened

[Dream Evil]

The trebuchet was pretty badass.

I don't know much about it's history, but it had to take some pretty ingenious engineering to develop a machine that could hurl heavy rocks or carcasses far and hard enough to take down a castle wall.

 

[moreorless87]

Really though you look at most successful pre mass gunpower armies and they mostly tended to work via well regimented units of men fighting together not super skilled individuals, Roman legionaries, Greek phalanx, British longbows, Mongolian horse archers, etc.

Generally it was the cultures who had disorganised warrior classes fighting alone that came off worst.

 

[I Am Legion]

Yeah, but back then you also had Mages or Wizards that could totally shift the tone of the battle in your favor. Like Merlin did. For me I would always rely on the power of my relationship telepathically with animals to win wars.

 

[Odoylerules22]

Agree with you here. I know what should be said, and maybe what TS wants to say, but I'm not going to save his lame thread. I'm not even going to single out the stupid things he said by quoting and responding. I will just say that plenty of smaller, less technologically adept, parties have defeated larger, more technologically advanced parties in modern war.

Just look at the U.S. since WWII. Not many wins besides like Panama and Grenada. The fact is that the U.S. is a joke, militarily, even though always superior technologically to their intended victims. Peasants have been kicking Uncle Sam's ass since WWII. Facts. Anyway, I'm not even going to keep on.

Shit example. Has the us even lost a single battle since korea?

 

[BearGrounds]

Go back even farther and you'll get to nukes again, only they were called
Brahmastra in those days.

Student: "Was the bomb exploded at Alamogordo during the Manhattan Project the first one to be detonated?"
Dr. Oppenheimer: “Well — yes. In modern times, of course."

Oppenheimer could read Sanskrit.

 

[TheNinja]

The Vietnam War throws your argument out of the window.

"Throughout history, in various wars and conflicts, there have been a number of victories won by a smaller force against a larger enemies. This shows that manpower and status never mattered, it all came down to individual skill-set."

This will hold true regardless of how advanced the weaponry becomes. The will to fight will always be the determining factor.

No. Vietnam war was lost b/c of politics, not b/c of manpower or physically getting beat. Look into it.

 

[listrahtes]

The classic war of attrition would not be a proper measure of victory in Vietnam. TET was proof that the Northern Vietnamese Army was far more strategic, advanced, and capable than the Americans ever envisioned. The casualty rate was now insignificant compared to the World Wars or Korea as a measure of success. The VC were literally buried into the land on all fronts. You had family members fighting for each side, something that classic war tactics could not ever account for. Their will to continue fighting completely outpaced the USA,regardless of political support or financial capabilities to sustain it.

Sorry to say but you are utter clueless. TET was all or nothing for the North. They revealed all their hidden cells in the south attacked on all fronts and got anhilitated. THe Vietcong got literally destroyed by that "tactic" and ceased to be relevant factor. You argue against literally all militrary sources.

The Vietnam war , just like Afghanistan was lost by politicians while it was secured in Afghanistan and close to secured in Vietnam.

 

[FyrFytr998]

Poor turn out at Ren fest, huh?

Everyone LARPing at Airsoft instead………

 

[Barksnight]

Of course the USA could've simply bombed the Vietnamese dikes, and the fighting would have been over, but the war would not have been won. Political fallout has been a part of every war since human existence. To ignore this is being intellectually dishonest. It's a hard pill to swallow that a bunch of rice farmers held their own against a modern technological fighting force, but the results don't lie.

Nice bs, you never mentioned politics and fallout.

This is the utter bs you spewed.

"Throughout history, in various wars and conflicts, there have been a number of victories won by a smaller force against a larger enemies. This shows that manpower and status never mattered, it all came down to individual skill-set."

So its you who being intellectually dishonest .

Go ask a military personal about manpower and how its matters or not before you utter such idiocy ever again.

 

[William Huggins]

The trebuchet was pretty badass.

I don't know much about it's history, but it had to take some pretty ingenious engineering to develop a machine that could hurl heavy rocks or carcasses far and hard enough to take down a castle wall.

View attachment 985628

Great at throwing the enemies own dead back over the walls.....that and shit covered arrows/spears first types of biological weapons we've got on records.

 

[KnightTemplar]

Everyone LARPing at Airsoft instead………

View attachment 985738

Meal Team Six