Miltary tactics in movies are awful

fucking hell i am sick of this hussar meme shit

>>83210016
Why do they use the wings?

I thought polacks tried to keep their gayness in the closet?

File: 1464866692435.png (260KB, 484x605px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 484x605px

>>83210016
>It's like they don't care about their history
In other news: OP turns 12, realizes how Hollywood works

File: latest[2].jpg (102KB, 800x333px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 800x333px

Meanwhile, in Middle-Earth.

File: 3__8i9frssZ9.png (35KB, 520x390px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 520x390px

>it's a kurwa episode

>>83210016
>>winged hussars

There is little evidence they ever wore the wings, never into battle and at best used them only during parades and shit.

>>83210094

And also the hussar saber was the nuclear bomb of its time.

>>83210094
Came here to say the exact thing
Also, OP is a fag

>>83210094

they actually did, but the wings were way smaller than depicted, but call it an artist revision.

Also the rattling of feathers scared the enemies horses shitless

File: hussies.jpg (49KB, 416x594px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 416x594px

>>83210016
why didn't the winged hussars just fly the ring to mount doom

>>83210079
Outstanding. Note the cunning employment of combined arms and reserves.

File: 193atdcqkkuhkgif.gif (47KB, 240x240px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 240x240px

>>83210016
Ok cool story, Grzegorz, but my toilet is not gonna clean itself.

>>83210016
le winged hussars, man...
fucking woot

WE WUZ CAVALRY N SHIT!

File: 1452790764393.gif (1MB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 320x180px

>>83210016
I think there are a few historical dramas that use what was recorded in history. Thus, in those they at least show tactics that were actually used in war.

However, 99.9999% of all military tactics, from fire team sized to battle field sized modern times to ancient times, is just fucking pure shit that gets under my skin like nothing else. How many times have you seen a small infiltration team stop and have a drama session in the middle of sneaking in or in battle? Fuck.

Also, I could give a shit about, "hussars".

>>83210016
>It's like they don't care about their history

Or that running a wall of fucking horses and spears into your extras is going to fucking kill people, or look like garbage if you use dummies.

File: 108188[1].jpg (15KB, 263x277px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 263x277px

>it's a war movie where cavalry are used just like the infantry, instead of the ole' charging and retreating switcheroo

>>83211528
Horses won't run into spears, they're not that fucking dumb. Cavalry was used for flanking and breaking formations, something as slow and bulky as a phalanx can't deal with flanking cavalry because their spears are just oo long.

>>83210045
Hussars are literally the most overrated warriors in all of history
Even more than the Vikings, Samurai, and Spartans.
At least those three all of his rich history in addition to their numerous accomplishments
The Hussars may have history, but they were literally only relevant in the big picture for one battle and the Polish still wont shut the fuck up about it.

>>83211703

I was talking about the spears of the Hussars making the charge you mong.

>>83210336
how is it that the feathers would scare enemy horses but not friendly horses?

>>83211703
Learn to read son.

>>83211774
>>83211777
I was only pretending

>>83211776

Probably because they're trained for years with them?

>>83211776
>>83210336

Also, i've read the sound drowned out sounds of explosives which would spook horses.

>>83210999
Then they would need a pegasus, since the horses cant fly.

WE WUZ HUZZARZ N SHIET

why are you so delusional?

Do the polish like to talk about when they sent hussars up against a Panzer division in WW2?

>>83211998
Oh come on anon, I'm not even Polack but everyone knows that was a retarded myth
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge_at_Krojanty

>>83211998
That never happened

>>83212055
>>83212065
t. Polish

get the fuck out fags, here is mongol territory

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEIC0IYZSng

>>83212170
If you even ironically subscribe to nonsense like that then no-one is going to take you seriously.

>>83210016
It's pretty funny that the Communists made the best patriotic Polish films.

>>83212188
>strategy
That was gay as shit.

File: 9cc42b86c286a44433e5d64a91c0b46a[1].jpg (51KB, 599x480px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 599x480px

Hussars a shit.

Mongolian mounted archers are historically confirmed as such a lethal force that they conquered an entire continent alone.

>>83212819
Mostly because there were a lot of those fuckers. Kievan Rus, Poland and Hungary all suffered from feudal fragmentation. They were just lucky.

>>83212919
>Mostly because there were a lot of those fuckers.
The fact that each Mongol has at least two spare horses let them cover much more ground and appear two/three times as numerous than they were. When you have reports of a Mongol horde appearing in the south then immediately see a horde in the north, you assume it's two different hordes, despite it just being the same horde moving extremely fast. Their extra horses, lack of supply wagons and self sustainable riders let them ride at full gallop for a whole day.

>>83212819

>fight on an open steppe plain with mobile horse archers against civilizations that used mostly light/medium armored infantry in their tactics

yeah, conquering a land is easy, try keeping it together

>>83212919
>Genghis Khan probably fielded no more than 100,000 soldiers in total at any one time. This excludes conquered subjects pressed into service as infantry meat shields, though.

https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/21417/how-many-soldiers-did-ghengis-khan-field

>inb4 fake news

>>83213153
You're shifting the argument, all I was saying was that Mongol horse arechers were a much more formidable and effective fighting force than Polish Hussars.

Something that always triggers me is that movies always, always, ALWAYS use the wrong type of saddle.

>>83211753
The samurai were pretty useless they were only effective fighting other samurai. Samurai armor was all for show and status and offered little protection. The only thing cool about them is the way of the warrior. I wish modern japan could rediscover Bushido and uncuck themselves

>>83212819
this shit only works in shitty prairie and desert lands.
>hey look I conquered a bunch of sand and tundra
wooooowwww you're a cool kid Mr. Genghis Con and totally not overcompensating for your tiny mongol peen

File: continents.png (52KB, 1100x608px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1100x608px

>>83212819
They didn't conquer any continent on their own though. They didn't conquer any of these completely. Furthermore, most historians don't count Siberian Wasteland in the calculations for the Mongols, because it was worthless wasteland for them, furthermore, how does a nomadic civilization have an 'empire' when they are by definition not like that. The only nations to conquer a continent on their own were the British in Australia.

>>83213621
I actually laughed at this shitpost, thank you anon

>>83213749
But it's not a shitpost. It's true.

Waterloo did tactics well. But that was at a huge loss. Not like the Commies had a choice in pretending to be soldiers.

Why the fuck is there still not a movie about the siege of Vienna? You'd think that Hollywood would just cash on it for being a major historical battle but they still didn't.

>>83213979
But did Americans fought there?

>>83213979
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Eleven_1683

Hollywood would make them all American or something. Also

>putting Muslims in a bad light

>>83213703
>Australia

If you're going to argue Siberia doesn't count, you should be making the same argument for Straya.

Minimal resistance by a futile population, not particularly valued during the era in which it was conquered. Sure it has agricultural and strategic value today, just as Siberia has oil.

Also, fuck Straya in general.

>>83213979
Because Siege of Vienna isn't even considered one of the battles that changed history. It's not even considered in derivative works.

Listening to lindybeige sure makes watching hollywood films worse.

>>83214031
I never said it counted, only that it was a continent they took. Britain had the largest empire by size and only Mongolaboos try to argue this.

>>83214073
>Because Siege of Vienna isn't even considered one of the battles that changed history.
Yeah stopping the Ottomans from marching even further into Europe and bringing them into the beginning of their decline is not important. Are you stupid?

>>83214029
>>83214030
>Siege of Vienna movie by Hollywood
>Ottomans are portrayed as noble people
>many of the defenders in Vienna are black
>the hussar charge is led by a woman

File: 1457364544774.jpg (32KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 720x480px

polaboos, scandiboos, rusaboos are even worse then weeaboos.

>>83213621
Medium kek

>>83214125
I might be stupid, in your opinion, but dozens of historians, who are much more knowledgeable than either of us, don't count it as a history changing moment. The list is

>Battle of Marathon (490BC)
>Battle of Syracuse (413BC)
>Battle of Gaugamela (331BC)
>Battle of the Metaurus (207BC)
>Battle of the Teutoburg Forest (9AD)
>Battle of Châlons (451AD)
>Battle of Tours (732AD)
>Battle of Hastings (1066AD)
>Siege of Orléans (1429AD)
>Defeat of Spanish Armada (1588AD)
>Battle of Blenheim (1704AD)
>Battle of Pultowa (1709AD)
>Battles of Saratoga (1777AD)
>Battle of Valmy (1792AD)
>Battle of Waterloo (1815AD)

There are more opinions, like Battles of Gettysburg 1863, Sedan 1870, Santiago and Manila 1898. Quebec, Yorktown, Vicksburg, Tsushima, Stalingrad and others have all been added. But Siege of Vienna is not there.

The reason Siege of Vienna is not included is because it did not end the Ottomans as a power. In 1663 they launched an attack on St Gotthards Abbey, which was turned back. This is vastly more important as it resulted in the Treaty of Vasvar which gave 20 years of peace. They then attacked Vienna for the second time, which was repulsed, as we know. But the first Siege of Vienna, which is what you're obviously referring too, is not as deceisive as you think. It was a high-water mark for the Ottomans, but they still lasted another 250 years before the British dissolved them (and briefly made Constantinople Christian clay again, thank the Americans for making them give it up).

>>83210030
This, everyone knows that dragoons are the true breadwinners of the cavalry. Hussars are only good for looking like faggots and fucking the village harlot pretending she's the alderman's daughter.

File: klushino.png (179KB, 322x625px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 322x625px

>>83210030
>>83211753
>>83214575
You clearly don't know shit, stupid fucks.

Winged Hussars were the elite, just like Spanish Tercios, they were undefeated.

>>83214575
>>83210030
>laughing Life Guards
>laughing French Lancers

Superior than dragmemes.

>>83214606
Wellington literally never lost a battle but people still suck off Napoleon. Being undefeated means fuck all.

>>83214606
Replace those hussars with dragoons and the Poles wouldn't have even lost 100.

File: rod-serling-opening.jpg (14KB, 620x350px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 620x350px

>>83211837
>Imagine if you will. A man. Who is literally so autistic...

>>83214626
>1610
>Dragoons

Depending on who you believe, Dragoons weren't developed until 1620 as a accepted military unit. But Germans are autistic so who knows.

File: Screenshot_20170526-113718.jpg (282KB, 1059x1068px) Image search: [Google]

282KB, 1059x1068px

>>83211998
>>83212055
>poles on horses catch some infantry off guard
>krauts bring up tanks and drive off polish vac

Gosh, can't believe the poles were so backwards and out of date! They had no chance against the Mechanized German Supermen !

>>83211199
>Also, I could give a shit about, "hussars".
They're literally responsible for turning back the muslim hordes in Vienna.
Hussars were pretty based.

/tv/ - History and Battle Tactics

>>83214856
Which battle of Vienna? I literally school you earlier. Give me the fucking date as there are two sieges of Vienna. Do you mean 16th or 17th century? The one with Archduke Ferdinand or Sobeski (I can't remember the garrison commanders name)

File: 1424069518481.jpg (786KB, 2267x3054px) Image search: [Google]

786KB, 2267x3054px

>>83210016
>It's like they don't care about their history
History doesn't sell, dummy.

This your first year of Uni or something? It's probably the only reason you'd be pissy about this, I was pretty butthurt too after my first year of Military History.

Plus, fuck Hussars. They're up there with the autistic Mongols and Mongolboos wh-->>83212819 here it is. For fuck's sake, I'm tired of you fucking Mongolboos to no end. It's like you never took a Military History course at a decent University to swallow that kind of autistic bullshit instead of polluting the collective IQ by vomiting it.

Conquering a fucking wasteland matters jackshit when your "empire" dies with you.

>>83214525
Dunno what kind of "historians" you follow. Try talking to one. Everyone from Rouen, Sorbonne, Oslo, Coimbra, Porto, Salamanca, Uppsala and more consider it a battle as crucial for Europe as the Battle of Poitiers was. It's like saying the latter isn't important because the Al-Andalus existed for 700 years after it.

>>83213211
100,000 was a shitload for Europe in Medieval times. The larger kingdoms could maybe manage 20,000 if they pulled all of their resources, and the majority of that would be shit-tier peasant levies.

>>83214030
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Eleven_1683
Jesus christ this movie is so cheap looking, pretty sure they used the same after effects digital explosions and flames they used in Aqua Teen Hunger Force.

>>83214525
>battle of Tours
>but no mention of the first Arab siege of Constantinople of 674
that's how you know this list is bullshit
the Arabs at Tours were merely a raiding party compared to the gigantic army that was being ferried to Constantinople but lost because of Byzantine technological superiority. Had the Arabs won, they would've marched into Europe without resistance since most of Europe were just barbarians and nomads then.

>>83213584
>Samurai armor was all for show and status and offered little protection.

>>83214935
>>83215021
yeah, kinds sounds like he's pulling shit out of his ass
just ignore him, sounds like an armchair historian
also that "raiding party" conquered the entirety of spain, you're downplaying charles martel who is considered by many the greatest general and statist after charlemagne, don't be an idiot
you a turk or something? you sound like a turk

>>83214620
>Wellington

>>83214929
>I literally school you earlier.
I've never seen you before, asshole.

>>83214116
But the British never had a real empire. Look what happened the second they tried to take over some weaponless potato niggers. England never had an empire because the only countries they "conquered" were people in barren landscapes with stone age weapons.

>>83214935
>a battle as crucial for Europe as the Battle of Poitiers was
Was about to say this. So this retard has the Battle of Tours on his list but not the Siege of Vienna? Like neither Battles of Vienna are there. Probably an asshurt turkroach.

>>83214935
I literally explained why it's not as important. attack of St Gotthards Abbey is more important than Siege of Vienna (1588). Sir Edward Shepherd Creasy wrote the original 15, which has been expanded on by Stephen Crane, Viscount D'Abernon, Clarence Wharton, J.F.C Fuller, Fletcher Pratt, Joseph B. Mitchell, Noble Frankland, Christopher Dowling and Paul K. Davis.

Siege of Vienna (1588) was also hardly a decisive defeat. Buda still remained under vassalage to the Ottomans and, as I have already said, the Ottomans did other attacks later on which were much more important. Without the Treaty of Vasvar (or Peace, whatever) then Hungary, Austria, Bohemia and various other nations in Europe would not have been able to rebuild and resupply their armies.

The fact the Ottomans attacked again in 1683 (and lost) would suggest that the second siege (or Battle of Vienna if you want) was the more important battle. Why? Because the Ottomans never once again tried a serious attempt at taking Europe. The fact they DID try after 1588 is evidence that they weren't as fucked as you could think. It's only hindsight which allows us to go "herp de derp that's where it starts!". It was VERY possible that the Battle of Saint Gotthard could have resulted in the coalitions defeat, the fact it didn't and resulted in a peace that the Ottomans kept to, proves that's a more significant event. Furthermore, once again, Battle of Vienna (or Second Siege) was wholly dependent on the relief force saving the city.

File: fed up pepestart.png (48KB, 400x389px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 400x389px

>>83215103
>But the British never had a real empire
>it doesn't count if I say so
>literally taking over villages and wasteland as the Mongols totally does

And 'stone age weapons'? Fucking really? You do realise the Indians all had firearms, right? Hell, look up Wall Guns for a good laugh. And taking French and Dutch colonies is now 'stone age weapons' now? Fucking wew.

>>83215234
Pssst...
Hussar charge happened in 1683.

>>83215324
And? I wasn't talking about the Hussars though, I was talking about the fact the Siege of Vienna wasn't the reason the Ottomans got stopped. That the Battle of Vienna is a more logical choice if you must, but the Battle of Saint Gotthard was the real decider in the war.

File: 1425674709452.webm (3MB, 1296x540px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1296x540px

>>83210016
Nah, military tactics in movies are pretty accurate. Pretty sure this is what dwarves and elves would do in real life

>>83215507
>wait why are they running straight at the pikemen
>wait what
>oh my god what is going on

>>83213584

>they were only effective fighting other samurai

You spelled "peasants in cloth" wrong.

>>83210016
strange name for polish cavalry. literally translates from corsair/pirate. ulan was a lancer in poland.

>>83215507
Were they a sacrifice to please some gods or was that an actual elven strategy brought to you by a new zealand faggot?

>>83214525
Nobody's arguing it ended the Ottomans as a power. It's a history changing moment because it saved Europe. Had Vienna fallen they would've conquered ALL of Austria and Hungary and it would have been much much harder to topple them. Hell they could've started conquering inland parts of the HRE and Italy but that's just speculation right now.

>>83215507
why even have a spearwall

Because movies need more action and drama, than real life.

>>83215282
The British even took Mysorean rockets from the Indians, which furthered their own rocket-technology knowledge. We're talking state-of-the-art rocketry here. It's like saying the US only faced people with iron age weapons during WWII.

>>83215507
That's some classic elven showboating right there. Elves don't have a use for shields. Except for surfing.

>>83210079
>Gate is about as wide as your retard circle
>Rather than take formation and use it as a choke point you allow them to march around you into a perfect closed pocket

File: Maximilian.jpg (714KB, 1705x1791px) Image search: [Google]

714KB, 1705x1791px

>>83215234
Yeah, and I told you why your explanation is bullshit. Edward Creasy can suck my big fat dick, he precedes History as it stands today after it was criticised by the Sociology cunts and reshaped into a proper science. As do half the people on your cherrypicked list.

It's literally saying the Battle of Granicus doesn't matter because Gaugamela happened afterwards. Or that the Siege of Tyre wasn't crucial for the Alexander to march forward without worrying about getting surrounded. Or that the Battle of Chaeronea wasn't of great importance just because Alexander ended up burning Thebes anyway.

I've been to 16 Universities throughout Europe (most of the time punctual visits, but I had the pleasure of talking to Military History professors and scholars) and the only time I heard a semblance of that list mentioned was from Kelly DeVries and John Keegan (pbuh) who both disregarded it and moved on. DeVries is American, but still. The point being, it's so unimportant I completely forgot it existed until you mentioned it.

Repeat attacks does not excuse the importance of the battle, you have the fucking Battle of Marathon there. You realise how hypocritical that is? For the Persians it was considered a MINOR setback. And what do you know, it fucking was, considering Salamis and Plataea still happened later on.

Also no mention of Adrianople, which is considered by many (J.G. Monteiro, for example, in collaboration with other scholars) as the decisive defeat of the Romans (barely ahead of Cannae) and the death of the Pars Occidentalis as a military force. Valens fucking died in that battle. It's not even on the list.

You expect me to take it seriously? Why, because Ottomans persisted much like the Persians did after Marathon?

You diminish the importance of the Siege, had it fallen we're talking about Turks in Austria. You're implying reconquering would be easy?

Jesus Christ, and you're arrogant about it. I wouldn't be arrogant if I was wrong. You b8ing?

>>83216455
>let's march up to the fortified walls filled with rock-throwing trolls and shit so they can just decimate our forces without even fighting

Sound plan.

>>83215507
what the fuck

>>83210016
Why would people ever think that historical movies would be accurate? I mean have you seen modern day movies? Take a cop movie. Is that in any way a realistic portrayal of the aspects of modern policing? Of course not. Same with anything, fucking sports movie, court room dramas, whatever. But you make a movie about a knight, set it a thousand years ago, and suddenly people are outraged it's not realistic?

File: 1495546180396.png (838KB, 800x737px) Image search: [Google]

838KB, 800x737px

>>83210016
>>83210030
>>83214606
>>83214798
>>83215071
>>83215157
>muh Hussars

File: 1452715043980.jpg (196KB, 410x1162px) Image search: [Google]

196KB, 410x1162px

>>83215507
intensely upsetting every time

Pure Kino

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gCEo7SCvYH4

>>83214525
>Battle of Waterloo (1815AD)
>not Battle of Leipzig in 1813
Waterloo meant literally fuck-all. EVEN if Napoleon had managed to rout Wellington and EVEN if he had beaten Blucher and the Prussians, he was still going to get crushed by the Austrian and Russian armies in a week. He was already doomed by the time Waterloo even began. If he had won Leipzig, however, his empire would have remained intact and he would have been able to go on the offensive again quite quickly

>>83220013
don't try to reason with that idiot, he's been thoroughly BTFO ITT