01-16-2013, 04:47 AM
Quote:"16th century "non-ranged" purely infantry and mounted knights "That don't make any sense... that would be like saying "a roman legion that forgot to bring their pilums and helmets"
IF you remove the ranged weapons from one side you have to do it from both. And then you remove an importent component of the system.
And what size do we talk about? what country? A "italian" army would be diffeent form a frence or a english or a spanish
An army with a lot of heavy cav would be a problem to the romans...
If the infantry a peasan militia? town militia? Swiss pikemen? dismounted men-at-arms or?
How do the romans react when they are shot at by gunpowder weapons? shields are not much good against a gun.
Do each side know about the equipment and capabilities of the other?
In the end the two commanders would be pretty important.
Quote:"Medieval warfare seriously lacked tactical abilities and commanders that knew tactics."That is a statement that is in no way supported by facts. It is a generalization that makes just as much sense as saying that ALL roman emperor where incompetent and crazy.
Thomas Aagaard
