Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


Community Updates

420chan now supports HTTPS! If you find any issues, you may report them in this thread
Musketmen by Graham Mavingridge - Sun, 02 Oct 2016 19:47:46 EST ID:KCDGi4tU No.56914 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1475452066964.jpg -(293814B / 286.93KB, 1343x728) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 293814
So in the 17th and 16th century muskets used a matchlock or wheellock mechanism to fire and therefore took a long time to reload, leaving the musketeers vulnerable, so they needed Pikemen to protect them. My question is- why didn't they just attach the pike underneath the musket and turn them into Piketeers?

I mean if you attached it underneath the musket with hoops, you could move the pike along so the musket was at the centre of gravity when you fired it. And obviously if it got to close quarters you could just us the pike like a pike.
>>
Fucking Worthingspear - Sun, 02 Oct 2016 20:57:05 EST ID:ZcWe/zBy No.56915 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1475456225688.jpg -(208844B / 203.95KB, 446x585) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
Clearly you aren't familiar with either muskets or pikes. Even if the combination were somehow practical though, you'd have to do it really well to not give up the advantages of combined arms. Eventually they did that when someone came up with a good enough bayonet design.
>>
Frederick Fullernock - Sun, 02 Oct 2016 21:11:13 EST ID:KCDGi4tU No.56916 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56915
I'm certainly no expert on muskets or pikes but I'm not sure what you mean By " not give up the advantages of combined arms".
>>
Jack Grimbanks - Mon, 03 Oct 2016 04:28:18 EST ID:x/HDbWww No.56917 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56916
If a musketeer has to double as a pikeman, then efficiency and speed is lost. For example a hybrid as you described would have to stop reloading if threatened and switch to melee, whereas by combining arms the musketeer can focus on reloading while the pikeman is occupied with the threat.
>>
Graham Goodlock - Mon, 03 Oct 2016 19:57:56 EST ID:QloOc9co No.56918 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Already been covered pretty well but here's a helpful link for you OP
https://youtu.be/PbhANeJL_T4
Lindybeige is excellent and I thank whoever it was on here that first introduced me to him. You can learn a lot about weapons use in history by watching his videos, but after locking down about an hour I've picked up what he always mentions.

It boils down to the practicality of these weapons. Spears and Muskets were relatively practical by themselves, but if you combine the two of them then you have an incredibly unwieldy weapon that does both jobs half as well.
>>
Hamilton Goodshaw - Mon, 03 Oct 2016 21:53:48 EST ID:TL6DdA5o No.56919 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Because evolutionary pikemen were rapidly becoming obsolete. They were able to hold off cavalry that attacked with sabres but once the horsemen switched to shooting at infantry formations with their pistols the pikes just took useless casualties and it was considered a better option to have more muscets than pikes.
>>
Graham Blathercocke - Fri, 07 Oct 2016 18:25:53 EST ID:FqRGTRMQ No.56925 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56918
This.

Bayonets aren't good at all. They're dumb unwieldy slow unbalanced short spears. They also weigh down your gun, and make it harder to aim. They make reloading harder.

That's something they don't teach in videogames.

The only reason why bayonets became commonplace is because spears and pikes stopped being used. Suddenly an unwieldy bad slow unbalanced short spear became a lot better. Because it no longer had any competition.

Another point is that in the 16th and 17th century, all musketeers had their own sidearms, typically a sword and a dagger. So if they found themselves in a melee, they'd drop their gun, and use their sword.

But as the 18th century progressed, soldiers armed with guns became less professional, and more like retards with a gun. Replaceable retards with a gun. And no one is going to spend money on making swords worth more than a retard with a gun. So it became economically viable to just stick a knife on a gun, and give it to some retard and tell him to shoot other retards.
>>
Jack Blonkinhock - Sat, 08 Oct 2016 21:51:26 EST ID:bw6ZNCus No.56931 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1475977886806.jpg -(220504B / 215.34KB, 900x724) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>56925
Well the first bayonets were plug bayonets that sat in the barrel of the musket. It still amazes me they didn't work out that was a bad idea right from the very start.
>>
Cornelius Shakebury - Wed, 12 Oct 2016 08:33:24 EST ID:FqRGTRMQ No.56940 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56931
It does make sense from their perspective.

One of the main reasons why bayonets make for such shitty weapons, is that they're misaligned.

The thrusting blade doesn't line up with the general line of the weapon, making it imbalanced and a liability in melee combat. That unbalance will result in slower attacks and bad accuracy, and someone with an actual spear, or a sword can capitalize on that immediately, since they have much better balanced weapons.
>>
Augustus Sudgepet - Tue, 15 Nov 2016 01:38:58 EST ID:BBViIOJc No.56976 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56916

yeah your strength or adaptability are irrelevant when it comes to timing, whenever a threat is advancing, a defense/counter must be executed simultaneously. with mixed arms you may have less of each weapon available but there is a greater time range of group readiness and less openings of vulnerability
>>
Charles Hiddlefone - Mon, 16 Apr 2018 22:13:50 EST ID:pYW/9DNs No.57437 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>56940
In modern times the better trained soldier has such an overwhelming advantage I'm not sure it matters anymore. Bayonets seem like a silly affixment to a firearm, what few bayonetings that have happened could have just been done with the disattached blade.
>>
Lydia Gommertug - Wed, 18 Apr 2018 14:55:59 EST ID:wty78VYY No.57442 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Pikes came first and used to be the most common weapon on the battlefield while muskets were meant for support and holding off attacking troops while a giant pile of pikemen were supposed to just trample down enemy formations.
>>
Cornelius Blummerstone - Wed, 02 May 2018 03:56:35 EST ID:UBDjnNcI No.57449 Ignore Report Quick Reply
Also, muskets were relatively expensive to produce and less sturdy than a simple spear. Using them in melee combat would make them liable to break and thus causing the army a large economical penalty.
>>
Phyllis Chindleford - Thu, 03 May 2018 16:48:59 EST ID:ePy5Qkuv No.57450 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57437
Its a good idea for CQC


>>56940
Also I feel like it wouldn't be that hard to compensate for the misallignment by knowing that the bayonet is 6 inches or whatever beneath the barrel. Besides that, you can stab anywhere on the torso with them.. pretty big target area.
>>
Ebenezer Turveyforth - Sat, 05 May 2018 20:14:38 EST ID:rbK+gS1r No.57451 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57450
Yeah you can compensate for it when you're fighting unarmed people or fellow gun users.

But if you're up against someone with an actual melee weapon, like a spear or sword, you're fucked. Unless you're some kind of duel master. In which case you probably would use a sword or spear, instead of a bayonet.
>>
Henry Pungerdock - Tue, 08 May 2018 06:07:29 EST ID:vk3jeQdF No.57452 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1525774049180.gif -(41034B / 40.07KB, 425x640) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57450
I've been trained in fighting with bayonets in the military. It's not the alignment so much as the balance. Everything at the bottom near your hand is heavy and your weapon tip is extremely light. The complete opposite of any specialised melee weapon. It's also why sweeping from the back with the butt is a lot more satisfying.
>>
Angus Clenningwill - Wed, 09 May 2018 13:06:30 EST ID:rbK+gS1r No.57453 Ignore Report Quick Reply
1525885590497.jpg -(119038B / 116.25KB, 1000x749) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
>>57452
>It's not the alignment so much as the balance.

I love you bro, no homo.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.