Stopping cavalry with bayonets requires your infantry to hold their nerve, be brave and not run away at a horse coming at them.
This is difficult for non-anglos.
In the bayonet era infantry stooped cavalry with pistol range musket salvos. If the fucked up their salvo in some way cavalry butchered bayonet equipped infantry. Many such cases of cavalry cutting down infantry squares to the last men.
There was even special tactics to deal with infantry square. Baiting the fire. When cavalry parades around 100-200 yards to bait infantry to unload salvo prematurely. Then cavalry went charging and were on infantry before they could reload and no bayonet could save them.
Everything in bayonet era revolved around musket fire and musket was 70-80% of combat casualties (next casualty agent been cavalry sword).
In the bayonet era infantry stooped cavalry with pistol range musket salvos. If the fucked up their salvo in some way cavalry butchered bayonet equipped infantry. Many such cases of cavalry cutting down infantry squares to the last men.
There was even special tactics to deal with infantry square. Baiting the fire. When cavalry parades around 100-200 yards to bait infantry to unload salvo prematurely. Then cavalry went charging and were on infantry before they could reload and no bayonet could save them.
Everything in bayonet era revolved around musket fire and musket was 70-80% of combat casualties (next casualty agent been cavalry sword).
It wasn't good enough at all. Bayonet simply cant do do what pikes does in melee.
Pike wins melee against everything not pike.
Bayonet losses against everything not bayonet.
Simple as.
Musket won. In bayonet era musket casualties like i said were 70-80%, bayonet like 5%
Musket was The King.
While eternal boomer historical revisionists like too downplay its role.
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Also notice a trend of euros praising the effectiveness of bayonets and calling Americans retarded for not using more bayonet charges in the civil war, meanwhile the rifles were minute of man accurate to 300m
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
Well that's because bayonet charges were a huge part of warfare during that time.
The French in the Napoleonic era made it into an art form with their infantry collum tactics
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
the tercio stopped being effective in the 30 years war because of line tactics, not because of the bayonet which wasn't even widely adopted yet.
the napoleonic wars were 50 years older than the american civil war with far worse technology
4 weeks ago
Anonymous
>during that time
anon, the ACW was forty years after Waterloo, cheap rifle-muskets firing the Minie bullet had quadrupled the effective range, and the lever-action repeater was introduced two years before the end
that's a HUGE difference to ye olde Brown Bess >The French in the Napoleonic era made it into an art form with their infantry collum tactics
only against undertrained Continental conscripts who couldn't platoon volley like a British infantryman
The pike lasted until something, with a longer range that could be given to any retard, took its place. The bayonet simply gave them an option to fend for themselves if someone got close enough after being minced.
>How did pike and shot formations work
hoplite formation on all sides. good luck stabbing me, I'm behind 7 pikemen
>why did they fall out of favor?
100 arquebusiers in a line shooting beats 100 pikemen in a square standing
>why were they so effective
you could shoot pure pike formations while being safe from cavalry charges
>why did they fall out of favor?
eventually guns got long and light enough that you could put a bayonet on and no longer need the pikes
Bayonet in no way is replacement for pike.
Bayonet loses to infantry with pike in melee.
Bayonet cannot stop charging cavalry.
Pike was replaced by musket spam. make x20 times more musketeers and you will kill enemy before it can enter melee.
>Bayonet cannot stop charging cavalry.
lol, lmao
Stopping cavalry with bayonets requires your infantry to hold their nerve, be brave and not run away at a horse coming at them.
This is difficult for non-anglos.
everyone used squares in the napoleonic wars
it's the same for pikes retard
>t. dunning-kruger case study
In the bayonet era infantry stooped cavalry with pistol range musket salvos. If the fucked up their salvo in some way cavalry butchered bayonet equipped infantry. Many such cases of cavalry cutting down infantry squares to the last men.
There was even special tactics to deal with infantry square. Baiting the fire. When cavalry parades around 100-200 yards to bait infantry to unload salvo prematurely. Then cavalry went charging and were on infantry before they could reload and no bayonet could save them.
Everything in bayonet era revolved around musket fire and musket was 70-80% of combat casualties (next casualty agent been cavalry sword).
>Everything in bayonet era revolved around musket fire and musket was 70-80% of combat casualties
>(next casualty agent been cavalry sword)
I am always amazed at the ESL ability to be completely confident while also talking out of their ass and making shit up.
lads
every time
It wasn't as good as a pike, but it was GoodEnough while giving your formation much more ranged firepower
It wasn't good enough at all. Bayonet simply cant do do what pikes does in melee.
Pike wins melee against everything not pike.
Bayonet losses against everything not bayonet.
Simple as.
it was good enough because it won
Musket won. In bayonet era musket casualties like i said were 70-80%, bayonet like 5%
Musket was The King.
While eternal boomer historical revisionists like too downplay its role.
Also notice a trend of euros praising the effectiveness of bayonets and calling Americans retarded for not using more bayonet charges in the civil war, meanwhile the rifles were minute of man accurate to 300m
Well that's because bayonet charges were a huge part of warfare during that time.
The French in the Napoleonic era made it into an art form with their infantry collum tactics
the tercio stopped being effective in the 30 years war because of line tactics, not because of the bayonet which wasn't even widely adopted yet.
the napoleonic wars were 50 years older than the american civil war with far worse technology
>during that time
anon, the ACW was forty years after Waterloo, cheap rifle-muskets firing the Minie bullet had quadrupled the effective range, and the lever-action repeater was introduced two years before the end
that's a HUGE difference to ye olde Brown Bess
>The French in the Napoleonic era made it into an art form with their infantry collum tactics
only against undertrained Continental conscripts who couldn't platoon volley like a British infantryman
Yeah but you can just shoot the pikes retard, while the pikes can't shoot you
>why did they fall out of favor?
muskets and bayonets became the pike
Someone made a joke about how they like handling long sticks
Read up on the Spanish Tericos
>Chillin, takin potshots at enemy forces
>They get mad and charge at you
>Retreat into pikemen
Shrimple as that
The pike lasted until something, with a longer range that could be given to any retard, took its place. The bayonet simply gave them an option to fend for themselves if someone got close enough after being minced.