What the frick

What the frick

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

Homeless People Are Sexy Shirt $21.68

Schizophrenic Conspiracy Theorist Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    CAMERAMAN GET DOWN

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I will now watch sharpe.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Kubrick shot this scene pretty bad.

      Watch Waterloo instead

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Did you know that the British infantry had a higher fire rate from their brown bess muskets because they used a lower caliber ball and would tamp it down by dropping the rifle on it's butt rather than using the rod, this saves many seconds on reloading and won them many battles.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      im not sure that is true, it might be a meme originating from sharpe

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I need to watch Sharpe for research purposes..

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous
    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Cool.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        God, Sharpe is so stupid most of the time, but still good fun.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        90's kino

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      they would also train with live ammunition

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Sounds like lindybeige youtuber history. Dripping with francophobia.

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why don't they hide behind a tree and shoot? i bet i could take most of their army if i had a tree

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Because then a guy on a horse comes and fricks your shit up

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        horses are bad at dodging trees

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Exactly.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >pew pew pew pew pew pew

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >horses have peta plot armor

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          They're just that good of a shot.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            oof that's gotta hurt

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            i thought horses couldnt be made to charge into solid blocks of men.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              lol what? Calvary charges have always been a thing. Infantry just started using long spears and pit traps to stop them.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      damn vietnam was fricked

      crazy to think that world war II started forty years ago today

      thanks for the keks boys

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >why don't they hide behind a tree and shoot?
      Because cover shoot only works with rapid rate of fire and quick reloading. Siting behind a tree with maybe one other person as you take 60s to reload is a good way to get flanked. There would also be no volley shots so odds are a bayonet charge into your position would be very effective.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Dont move! We need you to die to increase the female rate back home!
    >Yes sir!

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    damn vietnam was fricked

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Didn't know ukraine had grassy fields for battle.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Sir can we bring some shields in the front line?
    >What for?
    >To stop the bullets sir!
    >lol coward

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >Carry a piece of metal thick enough to stop a musket ball.
      >Strap it to my chest to make it easier to carry.
      >Realise that I've just created plate armour.
      >Mfw muskets are the reason plate armour became obsolete in the first place.
      Good bait nonetheless.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >muskets are the reason plate armour became obsolete in the first place.
        not true they were just expensive

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          I thought plate armor died because it basically immobilized you and made you a sitting duck.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            maybe try not putting a small asiatic girl into it and see what happens.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              That just means a non-asiatic non-girl would fricking sprint in the samurai armor.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                and whats the usefulnes of being able to sprint around at top speed in your armor

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                To avoid cannon and gunfire.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                God damn weebs are moronic

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Armor or not, anyone sprinting at top speed cannot do it for very long.

                What the frick do you think the point of the webm was, then? morons.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Armor or not, anyone sprinting at top speed cannot do it for very long.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                They both enter the battle with horses and when shit hits the fan, its wood vs metal. Why would they sprint on an enemy? They have range weapons back then.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            >unironically believing a comedy show doing Japaganda to try and make their gay samurais wearing wood armour look better

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        A plate chest could reliable stop a musket shot from a far distance and was still worn, most notably by Spanish officers. The problem was armies were getting big and giving 200,000 infantry a steel chest wasn't exactly economical. Even before muskets, you weren't wearing plate steel in battle unless you were rather wealthy or a special unit sponsored by a lord.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It's not pretty, but this is what peak musket warfare was always destined to be. Hiding behind trees and cowering in foxholes is not how you win a decisive battle and take the field with this level of technology.

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    the korean war was pretty fricked up

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    crazy to think that world war II started forty years ago today

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >2001 is 40 years ago

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >2001 is 40 years ago
      moron

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah but they were hard countered by those zeppelin bombers. What a massacre that was...

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Watch this short explanation of why they fought like this

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    What the frick

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >tfw ranked 1 on the server

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >88
      We are fighting to save the people that can cure our grandchildrens gender dysphoria

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Why didn't they just land at night when all the Germans were asleep

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It was a different time.

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why didn't they just dig trenches?

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Bros, will they ever do a series about Napoleon? If they did, how bad would they frick it up?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      A grand epic about Napoleon was the lifelong dream of Kubrick, but he never got to make it because of how ruineously expensive it would be. Spielberg is how now confirmed as working on adapting all the work Kubrick did into a miniseries.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        which Spielberg? the one who made Jaws or the one that made Ready Player One?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          Whichever one is kicking about these days

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's probably impossible to do a series right where Nappy is the main PoV, but you could have the show be about a primary follower who often interacts with Napoleon. Jean Lannes, Davout, or Marbot, shut like that.
      If nothing else a show going from the siege of Toulon to Napoleon becoming first consul would probably have an excellent narrative arc. Have a brief prologue where he's just involved in the civil war on Corsica as a zealous Corsican nationalist before being forced to leave with his family would make for a great intro and show the complexities of that era.

      Hell, are there even any historical dramas where Napoleon is a protagonist? There's a billion stories written about Caesar or Alexander, in comparison, it feels like.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >It's probably impossible to do a series right where Nappy is the main PoV, but you could have the show be about a primary follower who often interacts with Napoleon. Jean Lannes, Davout, or Marbot, shut like that.
        Thats my thinking. Follow Soult in Spain, Ney in Russia, Lannes in the war of the Third Coalition. So many potential kino moments, but it would be so ungodly expensive

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >"During the campaign, Marshals Murat and Lannes were ordered to take a key bridge into Vienna intact, and so they attempted to bluff their way into possession of the bridge. Loaded with explosives, the Austrians intended to destroy the bridge the moment the French attempted to take it. Lannes, Murat, Bertrand, Belliard, and a few other officers crossed the bridge, telling the Austrians that an armistice had been signed that gave the French the bridge. Sending Bertrand with the Austrians to meet the Austrian commander, Murat and Lannes talked to the Austrians in an attempt to distract them from Oudinot's grenadiers who were sneaking up. One Austrian noticed the approaching grenadiers and lit a match to fire the artillery, but Lannes immediately seized his arm and demanded how dare he break the armistice without higher authority. Bertrand returned with Austrian General Auersperg, whom Lannes and Murat explained the same story to, and the Austrian general agreed to not fire upon them. Oudinot's grenadiers finished coming up, cut the fuses to blow the bridge, and with that the bridge was in French hands without a shot being fired."
          And there are billions more moments worthy of immortalizing in a series.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Filthy lying Frenchies. They ruined France!

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I'd welcome a Sharpe-type tv show about Jean Bernadotte, starting with him being a common soldier and how he rose through the ranks during the war/s and how he interacted with Napoleon, ending with him becoming the king of Sweden(despite still calling himself a Republican) just because they wanted to get on Napoleon's good side. The "death to all kings" tattoo stays, even though it's a myth.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Why don't they just invent automatics?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      fouling from black powder

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    absolute kino warfare. after the napoleonic wars the weapons got too powerful and all soul left. now its just people throwing high explosive ordnance at each other from far away.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Imagine if they came with weapons preloaded. They walked to the front, the front row laid down on the ground, the second row sat on their knees and the third row stood and they fired, and then they walked back to the line furthest behind and the men behind them repeated their process. My army would win all battles with this tactic.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine if they came with automatic weapons. My army would obliterate yours with this tactic.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        they didn't have automatic weapons back then omg anon

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        That was the premise of 1632
        >Aliens accidentally time travel a WV town of rednecks back to the 30 years war.
        >Modern guns obliterate rank and file armies
        >One redneck reveals he smuggled an
        MG back from nam.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      what if just walked around your army with my army

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        why would i let you walk around my army?

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          because your army is laid down and crouched and mine isnt, so ill just walk around you before you stand up and lay down again

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            Well that is clearly not possible. Army is not laying down. Its standing. So this is how it works

            Armies march towards each other on the battlefield.
            Armies get within firing range. They start reloading and shit. But here is my army is different, the army already has its weapons loaded, they don't have to load the weapons. The front row drops down, the second sits down, the third stands, they fire, a 3 row volley. Boom they run back and the next guys go forward the shooting positions, another 3 row army. They can do this maneuver quite quickly. The time it takes to drop down and stand up is that of couple of seconds. It will has no cost on maneuverability and you will not be able to obtain any kind of advantaged troop position.

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              >https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volley_fire
              very effective tactic, but it required good officers and a lot if discipline. i think you also played too much Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                holy shit that is exactly what i meant. I always wondered why they didn't do that but it looks like they did. In my view standing there in front another army and loading your gun while the other army is doing the same and you are standing there about to get shot that must take some serious discipline and balls. That is a lot more scary then getting it done fast and then getting out of line of fire. Haven't played Shogun 2 btw

                >Volley fire, as a military tactic, is (in its simplest form) the concept of having soldiers shoot in the same direction en masse.[1] In practice, it often consists of having a line of soldiers all discharge their weapons simultaneously at the enemy forces on command, known as "firing a volley", followed by more lines of soldiers repeating the same maneuver in turns. This is usually to compensate for the inaccuracy, slow rate of fire (as many early ranged weapons took a long time and much effort to reload), limited effective range and stopping power of individual weapons, which often requires a massed saturation attack to be effective. The volley fire, specifically the musketry volley technique (also known as the countermarch), requires lines of soldiers to step to the front, fire on command and then march back into a column to reload, while the next row repeats the same process.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Volley fire us how the Brits killed kazillions of Zulu warriors

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                that was very racist why would they do such a thing?

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Because they thought racism was jolly good time

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                This.

                that was very racist why would they do such a thing?

                I don't really know what their war goal was, I think slavery was illegal at that point. Maybe it was to protect the colony or some shit. Maybe also it was to scare the free settlers at Jones jonestown or whatever cause they had frickloads or gold.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                Self-defence.

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                How much drugs do you have to take to willingly charge into Willy Wonka and his band of merry riflemen

              • 1 year ago
                Anonymous

                >you are standing there about to get shot that must take some serious discipline and balls. That is a lot more scary then getting it done fast and then getting out of line of fire
                This is the reason why British officers have been considered the best leaders in firefights for the last 300 years. Imagine being able to get hundreds of soldiers to stand still, ignore direct gunfire, and quickly load a complex weapon just be yelling simple sentence commands. Few else could do it as good as the British

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Cavalry raids your baggage train and kills your camp followers.
        Your troops would rage quit your army if their disease riddled prostitutes/cooks died. Also all their stuff is there.

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    They're only meant to trade a few shots then get in stab range and have at it

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      yeah, the point is not to kill the enemy to the last man, but to convince the poor souls on the other side, that if they dont run away they'll all fricking die. shock and morale were huge parts of warfare back then.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        This is what made the French so compelling under Napoleon, every other country had royals that were terrified of a revolution, so the French lads knew if they lost it was off to the guillotine and back into slavery.

  21. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >Let's just run in a straight line towards the guys with guns!
    Wow such majestic tactics. Fricking turn off this slop.

  22. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I'm not a tactician but were cavemen so legitimately moronic that they thought "oonga booba, me safer as pack in brightly colored outfit, very grug, me no camouflage self or split up to go around big scary cannon"? Seems kinda sussy to me.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      So, the first thing to understand is that people were obviously not stupid back then. It was literally a matter of life and death, so they had every incentive to do what maximized the chance of winning the fight and surviving. So they fought like that because it was literally the best thing to do given the weapons and technology available at the time.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      someone posted a video above, but the main reasons for this is style of fighting is:

      >command and control
      you have no radio, so if your soldiers spread out you effectively lose all ability to control them

      >morale
      soldiers running around alone or in smaller groups are much more likely to get scared and run, rather than all together

      >firepower
      the guns they used were very inaccurate and took a long time to reload, so the best way was to fire in big volleys for maximum damage, noise and smoke to hit enemy morale

      >weakness to cavalry
      single or small groups of soldiers are very vulnerable to enemy cavalry rolling up on them and cutting them down.

  23. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Regardless, it is clear that the concept of volley fire had existed in Europe for quite some time during the 16th century, but it was in the Netherlands during the 1590s that the musketry volley really took off. The key to this development was William Louis, Count of Nassau-Dillenburg who in 1594 described the technique in a letter to his cousin:

    I have discovered … a method of getting the musketeers and soldiers armed with arquebuses not only to keep firing very well but to do it effectively in battle order … in the following manner: as soon as the first rank has fired together, then by the drill [they have learned] they will march to the back. The second rank, either marching forward or standing still, [will next] fire together [and] then march to the back. After that, the third and following ranks will do the same. Thus before the last ranks have fired, the first will have reloaded.[31]
    —Letter from Louis to Maurice

    Based Louis felt smart for thinking about that, but don't it seem obvious?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Every brilliant inventions seems obvious in hindsight.

      Like the wheel.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I just invented this shit again on my own so that must mean i am brilliant.

        This.
        [...]
        I don't really know what their war goal was, I think slavery was illegal at that point. Maybe it was to protect the colony or some shit. Maybe also it was to scare the free settlers at Jones jonestown or whatever cause they had frickloads or gold.

        I still remember that movie where they mow down zulu Africans. Good one. Could never be made today

  24. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It bothers me that the hats are angles the wrong way, I only learnt this by watching a video by an autist on Youtube

  25. 1 year ago
    Anonymous
  26. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Monarchs had to thin out the surplus plebs somehow. Couldn't have them unemployed and getting ideas.

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