- This topic has 6 voices and 5 replies.
-
Posts
-
Just a question if anyone knows – how did war tactics change throughout the ages? For example, we know that during the American Revolution the British were still utilizing the approach where they stood in formation and fired volleys while standing out in the open. The Colonists adopted a kind of guerrilla fighting style where they fired from hidden areas (e.g. walls or trees). During the 19th or early 20th Century the British employed the “square” formation where many soldiers were able to repel attacks on all sides when they were stuck out in the open.Other tactics included the Greek (and later Roman) phalanx formation, which was quite effective. Eventually tactics lose their force as warfare changes to adapt to different tactics. If you know of any specific tactics used at various stages of history, write it here. And if you know how, why, or when the tactic was eventually abandoned you get extra brownie points. 😉
This is rather a simplistic answer, tactics were changed out of necessity, due to the invention of more accurate weapons. During the American war between the states both sides still used what were called Napoleonic tactics or Napoleonic box. Whole Company's form a box able to lay down volley fire, this is fine if your weapons are inaccurate, add artillery, automatic weapons, and you had better disperse
I wonder, then, at which point in time Napoleonic tactics were abandoned. If they were still utilized in the 1860s, then it was between this time and World War I that they were abandoned. I know that WWI was the great “trench war” where lines were dug in and didn't move very easily. I wonder therefore if the 1910s was the time that steady firing formations were abandoned.
They changed with each advance in technology. The advent of the accurate rifled musket was the beginning of the end of Napoleonic tactics. The Machine gun was the end of mass charges and horse cavalry although it was learned too late in WW1. Now we have to learn how to deal with suicide bombers and fighters who don't wear uniforms. What next ????
I know when they should have changed, during the civil war. Modern weapons agaisnt archaic battle lines made for horrific casualties
The reason men lined up and fired at each other draws from the phalanx formation. Initially when firearms were first introduced, they were used in a single volley before closing to engage with hand-to-hand combat. Bayonettes were introduced so that firearms could also double as an edged weapons after firing. As the firearm became improved, techniques were developed to reload in an orderly fashion. Now volleys of fire could be used to whittle down the opponent. What ever side was able to reload quickest could get off more volley of fire before the charge.Now the reason for trench warfare in WWI was most likely due to the introduction of the machine gun.
From my limited knowledge:Whoever gained public support, whether you were the occupied or occupier, usually won the war.Just taking examples from the 20th century and our own history:Ireland and early America: a small, ragtag army, under incredibly intelligent leadership, defeated the most powerful military in the world because of the immense public support. Iraq: Al Qaeda has been defeated (for now and for the most part) because of public support that was earned by the occupying military (us).The Taliban is still powerful in Afghanistan because they have public support. The international community, both military and civilian, needs to do whatever it takes to change that, and the Rightwing (for the most part) Islam bashing needs to stop or we're going to lose Afghanistan. I believe right now the preferred war tactics lean toward guerilla warfare and counterinsurgency and I don't think we're going to see a change in that anytime soon unless and until we go to war with another superpower, then it's back to conventional warfare.
