If cavalry was countered by pikemen because they had longer reach, then why can't they just counter them back with even longer lances?

If cavalry was countered by pikemen because they had longer reach, then why can't they just counter them back with even longer lances?

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    It was easier to just give them a carbine and have them take potshots from a safe distance.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Horse archers>all

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You can carry a longer pike on foot than on a horse.

      Foot archers > horse archers
      don't seethe at me Mongol(oid)

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Horse archers actually had some trouble dealing with certain kinds of Heavy Cavalry and could be frustrated by high quality Foot archers.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Foot archers can shoot stronger bows and reload faster.
        Horses are big ass targets.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Banned by treaties to prevent an increasing escalation in pike/lance length

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Polish hussars did just that

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I knew their lances were long but man this is actually obscene. 6 meters? It's like... what... 18-19 ft?And they even called them "trees". Were they compensating for something? How do you even handle this?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >Were they compensating for something?
        yes, the length of the swedish and german pikes they were fighting during that period. with some success, even, considering there are a number of battles where polish cavalry routed western-style infantry formations in swedish and russian service.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How do you even hold that shit

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          It has counter-weight and is hollow inside. It's designed to break with ease

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What stops the pikeman from using an even longer lance?
            Foot soldiers will always be able to carry more.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              lances like that were pretty expensive and expendable.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                So what? Horses are expensive. A foot soldier army has more money to buy longer and more lances and aim them better.

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >Horses are expensive
                yes, which is why for cavalrymen the added expense of a lance is not a big deal. but for infantry it's a problem

                might as well ask why they put real wood interiors in bentleys and not hyundais

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                Are you brain dead or what? If you have limited budget it's more advantageous to get more foot soldiers with long lances than meme horse gays.
                Cavalry is garbage.
                >hurr you're already paying more so
                Losing wars like a retard 101

              • 1 month ago
                Anonymous

                >doesn't understand comparative advantage
                >calls others braindead
                I'm not going to argue with you, child. Have it your way.

            • 1 month ago
              Anonymous

              it sucked ass to carry a pike. it was heavy and awkward. it was such a problem that there were serious penalties if someone was caught cutting their pike short to make it easier to carry.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Hussar lances had empty spaces on the inside to lower the weight

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        This is pure poolish propaganda.
        There's nothing stopping the foot soldier from getting an even longer stick.
        It's easier to carry shit on foot.
        These retardedly long lances would work once or twice after introduction.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >It's easier to carry shit on foot.
          No it's not, fucking gay ass retard. Every hussar had a bunch of attendants and pack horses to carry his shit for him, while infantry had to lug their pikes themselves. And infantry are supposed to be cheap and expendable. A 5m pike works fine in 99.9% of all scenarios and in the 0.01% when they actually get charged by hussars you can generally just bank on the first line soaking up the impact and stopping the charge in its tracks.

          When will retarded zoomers finally understand that pitched field battles make up a tiny fraction of war, especially in this period dominated by months- to years-long sieges?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        How do you even hold that shit

        Aside from the mentioned empty spaces and counterweights Poles actually attached the lances to the saddle (which is visible in that image even). This helped to carry the lances around and also meant that when hitting the enemy it wasn't relying on the human strength to hold the lance because the horse, the hussar upon it and the lance were all attached together.

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because a cavalryman has to carry the lance and absorb the impact, the pikeman can brace his pike into the ground.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      lances are hollow and shatter on impact, at least proper ones over 3-4m in length.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    they did exactly that, anon.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What stops the foot soldier from getting even bigger pikes?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        practicality. which is also what stopped everyone else bothering with even longer lances. cavalry sucks at engaging infantry that doesn't budge regardless of how long their weapons are.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        practicality. which is also what stopped everyone else bothering with even longer lances. cavalry sucks at engaging infantry that doesn't budge regardless of how long their weapons are.

        Also everyone started using guns more. Cavalry would carry pistols to ride up and shoot the pikemen, and pike formations started to integrate the Arquebus.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Cavalry would carry pistols to ride up and shoot the pikemen
          That's disputed nowadays, the consensus seems to be that pistols were fired after charging with the sword. They'd shoot if the charge failed to press home but the primary weapon of the cuirassier was always the sword. It was the arquebus armed cavalry that would ride caracole.

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Charge cavalry into a disciplined formation of pikes
    There are better choices than wasting your best men and horses on a frontal attack.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    That is a quality fat dog wife.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *