Login or register


Last status update:
Date Signed Up:3/31/2012
Content Thumbs: 5 total,  2 ,  7
Comment Thumbs: 239 total,  339 ,  100
Content Level Progress: 1.69% (1/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 40% (4/10)
Level 123 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry → Level 124 Comments: Respected Member Of Famiry
Content Views:597
Total Comments Made:181
FJ Points:260

latest user's comments

#108 - I mean, depending on when it is that could work, japan had a w…  [+] (5 replies) 12/25/2015 on Star wars : 40k style +3
#110 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (12/25/2015) [-]
Then again, samurai were mostly horse archers. A skilled mounted bowman is always going to defeat a footman with poor armor and a rifle with crappy accuracy.
#118 - angelusprimus (12/25/2015) [-]
Unless they are in a triple line.
Oda Nobunaga was famous for breaking enemy cavalries with his multiple rifle lines.
Tokugawa shoguns later stopped developing guns and limited their use to concentrate on their samurai.
That worked so well for them.
#178 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (12/25/2015) [-]
Yes but those cavalry men were usually equipped with naginata or yari, not a bow, and they charged the enemy head on most of the time. The important thing about fighting against riflemen formations is not to charge them head on. If you have a couple of skilled mounted bowmen who can fire while constantly moving around, a formation of rifle-men doesn't stand a chance in this time period, especially in japan, where the armor riflemen donned was so poor it could not even stop an arrow.
User avatar
#180 - angelusprimus (12/26/2015) [-]
They had bows, japan unlike europe and china is mostly not very flat country.
Especially around fortified areas.
Nobunaga was master of guns and master of terrain. He would simply place his gunmen at strategic choke points, protect them with spearmen, and then cover the approaching horsemen with a hail of bullets.
#181 - nightmarexnxnxnxnx (12/26/2015) [-]
That is what I was saying. Cavalry that got destroyed by riflemen formations usually was not equipped to deal with them at range. On the other hand, horsemen equipped with bows usually won out against riflemen.

The problem is with this matchup that it takes immense amount of practice to ride a horse and be accurate enough with a bow at the same time, whereas using and reloading a gun is something even levied peasants could learn how to do quickly.

Also, I was talking about a battlefield scenario. In a scenario of siege combat, horse archers are useless, as they don't have enough room to maneuver properly. Doesn't change the fact bowmen will still win out against riflemen in that time era, which is why samurai were still in use even in the time of gunpowder based weapons.

This all however changed when rifles became too advanced for bowmen to keep up with, leading to abolishing usage of bows in warfare by everyone excluding traditionalists.
[ 181 Total ]

user's friends