08/10/2017 (Thu) 10:54:19
>infantry fire was so embarrassingly ineffective in the past 300 years
I'm not so sure about accurancy of rifles in 1700-until breach loading became popular in military.>>8972
Hm I'm seeing a few flaws in that experiment. To kill one soldier sometimes you need just one hit. Meanwhile in one salvo one soldier (that on front line) could get multiple hits, dying but also serving as a shield for those behind him. Also ball could have gone between soldiers landing somewhere where it have done little harm, while on a 100 metres long target it would show a hit. Line infatry didn't neccesarily stand in super tight arm to arm formations, right? Also also you will get different results while doing a prepared experiment in calm conditions then in real battle when bullets fly everywhere, people around you are dying violenty, gunpowder is gettin wet, your weapon is failing, officers are nowhere to be seen and you just shat in your pants.
So I'm not totally convinced about those number differences.
I'm a bit late to discussion and I haven't read entire thread yet so please forgive if it was already adressed.