Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Name 5 weapons You think changed history


Recommended Posts

MG34 - first successful general purpose light machine gun.

MP43 - first true assault rifle.

M1 Garand - first successful mass produced semi automatic military rifle.

British Brown Bess - help GB change the history of much of the world for decades.

Colt Walker - the beginning of a long line of firearms that changed the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No cavalry here? (horse, chariot, tank, chopper, etc.)

Maybe... (just my thoughts, FWIW) The chariot was not the big deal people think it was. It only worked on battlefields that were meticulously prepared by slaves ahead of time - they had to go and remove all rocks and stones lest the chariot hit one and overturn. Pretty pathetic. I can't think of a battle where the horse itself proved ultimately decisive. True, it did allow for some interesting hit and fade tactics by asian steppe horseback archers and whatnot, but history changing? I don't know. Armies without cavalry beat armies with cavalry... When I think of history changing weapons, I think of things that made everything that came before obsolete or at least required that all sides have the weapon in order to be on equal footing.

I heard this vague rumor once about a little group of almost all horse archers. Mongols I think. ;)

No they didn't last and yes they used other things like good bows but at their heart they were horsemen and I do think they had a profound influence on the world. Remember the world isn't just Europe and all points west.

I do see your point though, the horse itself was not a game changing weapon. But I think Genghis Khan figured out how to use the horse archer, in combination with other forces, far better than anyone else up to that point. So maybe the game changing weapon in this case is superior tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Media. Being able to illustrate to the world the shortcomings of another countries leaders or see war live on CSPAN from your living room wields the power of public perception. This leads to fear and fear is one of the most potent weapons we have.

Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True, it did allow for some interesting hit and fade tactics by asian steppe horseback archers and whatnot, but history changing? I don't know.

I heard this vague rumor once about a little group of almost all horse archers. Mongols I think. ;)

Who do you think "asian steppe horseback archers" are? :) And, there were more than just Mongols - the Scythians had some fabulous cavalry archers, too. The thing is, when presented against massed archers on foot, or massed infantry, mounted archers were generally ineffective. The effectiveness of the mounted cavalry was in it's ability to harass and frustrate - and thus lead to bad decisions, like trying to chase down the archers and instead be drawn into a trap.

No they didn't last and yes they used other things like good bows but at their heart they were horsemen and I do think they had a profound influence on the world. Remember the world isn't just Europe and all points west.

I think if you really look into it, the horseback archer just wasn't a game changing type of factor. They didn't completely nullify some other existing technology or strategy like other things.

Cavalry in general provided some degree of mobility, and were used by good strategists to put pressure on the armies of lesser generals, and there's a lot of romance around them (after all, except for the asian mounted archers, the cavalry were all rich guys). But they just weren't the weapon system they're purported to be...

I do see your point though, the horse itself was not a game changing weapon. But I think Genghis Khan figured out how to use the horse archer, in combination with other forces, far better than anyone else up to that point. So maybe the game changing weapon in this case is superior tactics.

The thing is, a lot his use of the horse was for raiding unarmed/unskilled civilian villages and caravans. Hardly a worthy test of a weapon system.

But, yes, strategy and will were the deciding factors there, in my opinion, not the horse. A foe using superior tactics against mounted archers can easily counter them...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...