If armies would deploy and stare each other for several days

>>1672720
the french were very disorganised and were probably being very dumb about it

>>1672720
In battle line of sight was extremely important. Also a forest is naturally disrupting for movement/communication, a small unit of English would be able to disable a much larger French force.

File: cedynia.jpg (269KB, 829x650px) Image search: [Google]

269KB, 829x650px

>>1672720
Forests reduce mobility.

Other than that in case of Agincourt French sincerely believed that they will stomp the English.

In some battles the forests were used very eagerly though

Forests ARE walls to knights on horseback.

The French nobility was not about to get off their hoses and conduct some sort of wargame flanking maneuver.

They had the English cornered and outnumbered.

The mud did them in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt#Main_French_assault

>The impact of thousands of arrows, combined with the slog in heavy armour through the mud, the heat and lack of oxygen in plate armour with the visor down, and the crush of their numbers meant the French men-at-arms could "scarcely lift their weapons" when they finally engaged the English line.[50] The exhausted French men-at-arms are described as being knocked to the ground by the English and then unable to get back up. As the mêlée developed, the French second line also joined the attack, but they too were swallowed up, with the narrow terrain meaning the extra numbers could not be used effectively. Rogers suggests that the French at the back of their deep formation would have been attempting to push forward and quite literally add their weight to the advance, without realising that they were hindering the ability of those at the front to manoeuvre and fight, actually pushing them into the English formation of lancepoints.

No radios back then.
Having done my time as a modern soldier I know things start to unravel very quickly if comms go down, unless you have superb lower-level leadership in the smaller units that have been sent out to accomplish some task, and who are perfectly able to accomplish said task without further orders from higher.

In a time of peasant levies commanded by drums, horns, and banners...
Difficult.

Just try playing a Total War game in that "realism" mode with no unit banners telling you where your guys are and restricting your line of sight to your general. If they're out of sight, dem bois gone.

>>1672720
In addition to reducing mobility, line of sight and cohesion of your units, moving through a forest likely crippled your communication. Say for example you send the left third of your men into a forest. What happens if the enemy deploys overwhelming forces against that flank? You'd have to warn the men you've already sent, telling them to withdraw, but they're less able to hear your drums or bugles, so you have to send runners.

But then what if the situation changes again? More runners have to be sent, possibly before the first orders even reach your men. It's a command and control clusterfuck, even on a higher scale. On a lower scale, moving and fighting in formation is fucked by forests, as is cavalry movement, so enemy skirmish actions are a lot more effective, essentially letting them keep you at bay with inferior forces. You'd be throwing your men to an area where the enemy can dedicate far less men to fix and delay them, leaving your main force weaker.

>>1672954
The text you quoted was about the main charge which was on foot btw
I don't know why so many people wrongly believe the charge at Agincourt was on horseback

>>1672720
I can tell you've never tried to move a group through a forest in an organized fashion.


It's fucking impossible unless you're dealing with a small bunch that existing paths can accommodate.

If you are, enjoy your ambushes.

If you aren't you will be late, and some men will end up coming out the wrong fucking side.

>1/3rd of your army

So what happens when the enemy rushes your now much smaller main force and crushes it?

>>1672720
City Cuck detected
Most Forests you would have trouble walking two wide in
How the FUCK would a solider in Armour or cavalry get through that shit

>>1672979
>Just try playing a Total War game in that "realism" mode with no unit banners telling you where your guys are and restricting your line of sight to your general. If they're out of sight, dem bois gone.
>use that
>the entire game is now much harder and you are forced to disperse elite units in the middle of your lines piecemeal to stiffen the men's resolve.

thats pretty fucking realistic.

[spoiler]even for warhammer. :^) [/spoiler]

>>1673058

You'd want this part then:

>The French cavalry, despite being somewhat disorganised and not at full numbers, charged towards the longbowmen, but it was a disaster, with the French knights unable to outflank the longbowmen (because of the encroaching woodland) and unable to charge through the forest of sharpened stakes that protected the archers. John Keegan argues that the longbows' main influence on the battle at this point was injuries to horses: armoured only on the head, many horses would have become dangerously out of control when struck in the back or flank from the high-elevation long range shots used as the charge started.[44] The mounted charge and subsequent retreat churned up the already muddy terrain between the French and the English. Juliet Barker quotes a contemporary account by a monk of St. Denis who reports how the wounded and panicking horses galloped through the advancing infantry, scattering them and trampling them down in their headlong flight from the battlefield.[45]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt#French_cavalry_attack

>with the French knights unable to outflank the longbowmen (because of the encroaching woodland