You will never advance fearlessly towards enemy fire with British

> wanting to dress up like a clown
> all your gear is just decoration, not practical in any way
> go into the open without any armour or covet at all
> die an overly glorified death in the name of a king that treats you like cannon fodder

I feel your pain op. I too wish you'd die like them.

>>32186750
May I suggest to you to commit suicide, my good sir?

>fearlessly
I'm pretty sure some of those guys would be shitting thier pants, and any one with a brain would be wondering why they have to just slowly march into fire and see how many die before they get there.

>>32186750
the only thing that bothered me about some of these scenes is how the officers are in front of the bayos, not at the end of each column where they would be

File: donald-trump-bombarded-diana-with-flowers-after-divorce-136399825474503901-150817094009.jpg (23KB, 648x365px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 648x365px

>>32186750

OP these faggots don't understand that was the way war was done back in the day, that the redcoats carved an empire from just that, and thrashed every european power and nig nogs doing just that.

>>32186787
Not enough Velcro for you, bud?

>>32186750
>Wanting to die for a tyrant

Fuck off, /k/ is an American board.

>>32187112
>trip on loose ground
>get shanked by your own men
just another day in bongistan

>>32186750
>grenadiers
Can someone explain Musket-era grenadiers to me? Did They literally light and shot-put grenades at the enemy? I always read about them being bigger, stronger, and higher-speed than line riflemen, but still can't understand how they made any sense.

File: Washington Charger.gif (1001KB, 267x175px) Image search: [Google]

1001KB, 267x175px

>>32186750

>>32186787
>> all your gear is just decoration, not practical in any way

>Wool, all-weather uniform
>Spats to keep the thistles and shit out of your pants.
>Waterproof satchel for shot load, each space grooved for ease of access.
>Socket bayonet, infinitely better than the plug bayonet.

Okay, pal.

File: 1476641094604.jpg (120KB, 392x495px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 392x495px

>ywn crush Englishmen under based Jackson at New Orleans with the support of a pirate fleet

>>32191758
>Did They literally light and shot-put grenades at the enemy?
yes, hence the name grenadier. by the 18th century they werent doing that anymore tho
>I always read about them being bigger, stronger, and higher-speed than line riflemen, but still can't understand how they made any sense.
why not? grenadiers were stronger and better trained than the average hat company soldier. the other side of the coin were light infantry brigades, who would have fought less so in the traditional european sense, more flanking, faster paced battle tactics.

>>32191758
>Did They literally light and shot-put grenades at the enemy?
initially yes, hence the taller stronger men with the better throwing arm being selected, however grenades were increasingly less common and grenadier units simply became the elite companies of their regiments.

>>32191758
>I always read about them being bigger, stronger, and higher-speed than line riflemen
often also picked veterans, the grenadier companies and the light infantry companies generally had their pick

>>32186750

Fuck you, Loyalists.

>>32186750

My first ancestor in America did that under two different generals.