Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

IBAZERKERI t1_izz8oxo wrote

Reply to comment by Imtiredcanistop in How many knights in Armor would be on a battle field? by autism_guy_69

do some research dude. seriously theres a bunch of videos about this subject.

its a myth the english nobility used as propaganda.

much like carrots improving your eyesight.

3

Imtiredcanistop t1_izz92sj wrote

You don’t get it, I’m aware the longbow themselves didn’t kill armored knights, but you don’t have to blow up a tank to render it a battlefield casualty. You wound a knight, get em stuck in the mud, make them advance on foot vs horseback so they’re exhausted, it effectively defeats them.

2

IBAZERKERI t1_izza7qe wrote

yes. i do. you are the one thats displaying a complete lack of understanding here. not me

−1

Imtiredcanistop t1_izz9ada wrote

What you’re basically saying is the outnumbered English basically got lucky the inept French decided to fight up a hill in the mud and just kept marching like lemmings to their death. Arguably one of the supreme powers of the day was not that inept.

2

IBAZERKERI t1_izz9mu0 wrote

yes. this is what im saying and its the truth. they were that inept. atleast in this battle. the mud absolutely hampered there ability to both advance and retreat

3

Imtiredcanistop t1_izzb92u wrote

You realize you can go to the Wikipedia page and read the whole account of the battle right? Like…. It says that the English archer was very effective at wounding the unarmored horses and causing a rout of the Calvary which then tore threw their own infantry ranks, the armored foot soldiers had to keep their visors closed to protect from the lucky arrow finding the weakest part(eye and breathing holes) thus making it hard to see and breathe…by the time the French men-at-arms reached the archers they were mostly wounded or heavily fatigued, and the archers use knives, hatches, clubs, or short swords to decimate the French…. So….. my argument that the longbow would won that battle would hold water you pompous buffoon

5

Imtiredcanistop t1_izzbhae wrote

Never mind that that single battle resulted in either the death or capture of half the French nobility… you can argue semantics i suppose, and say that the longbow didn’t kill the knights, but the archers tired em out then poked em with knives instead, but that’s just foolish

3

IBAZERKERI t1_izzbo7s wrote

yes, ive read the wiki, ive also watched numerous other videos on youtube that go indepth into things such as weather, tactics, armorment, commanders and more.

your the one thats changing the goalposts after being called out for making fallacious claims and now resorting to name calling. i think you need a rag to whipe all that paint off your face you clown. grow up

−2

Imtiredcanistop t1_izzc82e wrote

I’ve changed no such argument, i stated the archers defeated the “tank-like” knights, and that is fact.

1

Superb_Tiger_8376 t1_j0658yr wrote

Choosing the right battlefield is not luck, though. They might have taken position their intentionally, knowing it would be hard for the knights.

1