Comments by "Limrasson" (@Limrasson) on "MasterofRoflness" channel.

I'm not saying it was pointless to resist Ghengis Khan, I'm just saying that when he showed up in my Crusader Kings 2 playthrough (I played in the Nepal region) I decided to give him and his sons like 4 of my female relatives (after he conquered my decisively, of course). In return I have received like 3 kingdom's worth of land and that's how the Nepalese empire was born.
2000
@tatarcavalry2342 pike&shot is literally just a phalanx with guns instead of shields.
486
@gregghunt8859 Monks: "Stop hunting and having sex for immortality." Ghengis: "I refuse"
259
@zathary564 Now if we suspend memeing for a second, one could see a possible reasoning behind nukespam, effectively trying to minimize the use of conventional forces (and therefore incurring conventional losses) as a reason to glass the enemy if you can. But I have no fucking clue what actually went through MacArthur's head. Maybe he just saw "big bomb go brrrrr" and thought it's exactly the same as using any other type of weapon.
79
I've looked into it a bit, and looks like he did actually suffer from mental health issues, reportedly when the lingust found him he was actually talking gibberish until he did manage out some words. Of course this doesn't prove that he was ineligible when he became a pow, but it makes more sense that way.
63
@tatarcavalry2342 Phalanx isn't from the modern era, the point is that based on description it seems like something that is really powerful, but requires support, just like tanks.
19
@toarexer A rézfánfütyülőjét!
18
@tatarcavalry2342 Yes, but the idea is rather the same. It's just that in an ancient time in which bows were shit and javelins couldn't blow up a tank yet, a super tight formation of pikes, when supported well, are amazing. Well in that regard I would guess that the closest to a phalanx would be tanks in WW2 and maybe even today.
17
@azarshadakumuktir4551 Well, but of course, makes me think of both tanks (Especially heavy battle tanks) and battleships. During their time, in the correct environment and with support, they would be insanely effective. But without support and when the military doctrines evolve, they can become rather awkward and obsolete. (Just think of the Yamato, an amazing battleship, being screwed over by both factors)
2
@seanrowshandel1680 I was agreeing with your assesment. Phalanx wasn't as heavily armoured, but it was definitely used and used on the mediterran area. So if it was hot, then the men just bear it. But have to remember that a formation of humans comes off as a rather flat blob. When outside this means that the heat generated has a place to move upwards. The hotter it is the faster it cools down as well. Meaning without insulating the system properly, the effect of generated heat shouldn't be as bad. This doesn't mean you can't get a heatsroke mid-combat, it just means that I wouldn't say the formation itself had much of an effect on this. So yeah, you would be the weakling.
2
@theoneandonlydetraebean8286 shoots baguette from a horse
1
Well, after playing some Shogun 2 sea battles, I know how this had happened.
1
@BigScreamingBaby Except it didn't made it 10 times more effective. You'll have to elaborate if you think it did.
1
@BigScreamingBaby What I meant that yes, the formation including essentially 2 weapon types is better (although I wonder if the backlines in phalanx could throw javelins, or just put ranged behind the phalanx or to the sides of it) But there are ages of difference between the two, if you compare phalanx against pike&shot or modern tanks, obviously a tank is the best, right? But of course a phalanx didn't had to worry about cannon fire either. Phalanx also had "long" range, because of the ridicolous pikes they had, which is why the business side of it was a nope zone, right? But just like tanks you would have issues if you send them in alone. I suppose the literal point of a pike&shot formation is to allow the gunmen to fire standing in a more lose formation of pikes that can turn (or even adapt a box/circle formation) to repell cavalry that wants to exploit reload times and such.
1
@azarshadakumuktir4551 IF you are bringing in horse archers into the mix then sure, but remember horse archers shenanigans were broken a thousand or so years later as well.
1
@Luluchan00 It's actually the combination of all the factors.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 What? :D :D :D Basically any formation that's outside and under high heat pressure will remain cool. How close the formation is has almost no consequence when it's outside.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 Exactly.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 You aren't actually chained together, this is why this formation has multiple rows. Again, no real expertise needed anywhere, especially for the phalanx, it's a formation a kid could come up with. Multiple rows of pikes behind shields means anyone coming from the front is fucked. Shields and armour means that it is at least resistant to projectile attacks, again mostly from the front. But it's slow as dirt and vulnerable to disruptions. Again, there is no big magic here. Carrying around a giant spear in a tight formation under the mediterran sun is exhausting, especially if you get pelted by slingshots, arrows and javelins all day. Meaning what it comes down to is how and when an engagement happens and what other forces are present on the field. You wouldn't be part of a phalanx, you would get a shield, a sling and a bag of rocks.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 That's not much of a concern. You would get exhausted eventually, but thirst would be a bigger problem anyway (and even that wouldn't matter much in a battle) Again, you don't have to be a military expert to think about it, if you have a slow but strong formation that is almost invulnerable from one side and is your most expensive unit? What do you do with it? You use it to control the battlefield. If you have any narrow passes due to difficult terrain or any other factor, these guys can lock it down or walk through it. And now is the time to look at the topographical map of Greece. Consistently the moment you look at areas of great plains and flatlands, whoops, horse archers. Or alternatively from ancient times you have chariots. Hell, I bet if we looked really into it we would find that a lot of fighting techniques can be tracked back to area appropriate survival tools.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 I thought I was clear about the broad overview part. THe devil is in the details and that's were actual expertise, knowledge and research comes in. But it doesn't invalidate the layman's viewpoint. Morale is a real thing yes, but also you have to consider that we aren't talking about you going into battle, but someone whose entire job is to do so.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 Oh yeah, so unexpected that most are not classical age warfare experts, kekw.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 What does that have to do with anything? I did notice that you have been rambling a lot, but I've tried to focus on parts that make sense. If you think you have a point, bring it up. Also it is you who we have established as a weakling, not me.
1
@seanrowshandel1680 roflmao
1
@seanrowshandel1680 nice 👍
1
@whiteeye3453 The phalanx itself was, because that's the point of it, right? But that doesn't mean it wasn't supported by scouting or skirmishers. It's like how tanks are supported by infantry or the like.
1
@whiteeye3453 bruh, read what I said again
1