this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
531 points (97.3% liked)

Greentext

4459 readers
504 users here now

This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.

Be warned:

If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HenryWong327@lemmy.ml 113 points 9 months ago (13 children)

The Youtuber Brandon F has a 4 part series talking about why they fought like this. Spoiler- it wasn't because they were stupid.

Part 1

TLDR- if you split up you just get run down by enemy cavalry.

Part 2

TLDR- a close formation lets you concentrate your firepower at one point.

Part 3

TLDR- a close formation makes communication and controlling the army much much easier (or even possible at all).

Part 4

TLDR- the formation makes the troops less likely to run away.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 3 points 9 months ago (4 children)

TLDR- a close formation lets you concentrate your firepower at one point.

Can't they just all aim at the same spot no matter where they're standing?

[–] Anamnesis@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago (1 children)

They only had a range of like 50 yards. Split your troops up and they can't aim at the same point because they wouldn't all have the range to hit it.

[–] Rodeo@lemmy.ca 1 points 9 months ago

I mean you can still have guys standing further apart than shoulder to shoulder. 50 yards is still something to play with.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)