In fact, the so-called cavalry wall charge is not a new tactic. Gao Pragmatic even thinks that this tactic itself is not clever.
In fact, in Gao Pragmatic's view, the development of modern firearms to a certain stage means the demise of all cold weapon cavalry. The so-called Western cavalry tactically crushing the Eastern cavalry is entirely an effect made up by the foreign slaves.
In the cold weapon era, Western cavalry was no match for Eastern cavalry - the Mongols taught them how to behave very early on.
The reason why the Western cavalry was able to defeat the Eastern cavalry in modern times was simply because they used hot weapons instead of cold weapons and had a huge advantage in weapons and equipment. Gao Pragmatic has always felt that if both sides used hot weapons of equal power, the Eastern cavalry would probably
The roundabout strategy and tactics will still prevail.
The success of modern Western cavalry is based on the system of infantry, cavalry, and artillery as well as the absolute superiority of firepower. Without the support of the infantry and artillery systems equipped with advanced firearms, a single formation of modern Western regular cavalry will still be attacked by the Eastern tradition.
The cavalry slowly bled to death like a pack of wolves hunting a buffalo.
To put it bluntly, the dense and neat cavalry charge formations of modern Western cavalry, without the support of the modern gun system, would appear to be nothing more than a suicide charge if viewed horizontally and vertically.
In fact, this kind of strict, dense and neat cavalry charge existed in ancient China and medieval Europe, and they were all heavily armored cavalry. Not to mention Europe, it appeared twice in China alone:
The first time was during the Northern and Southern Dynasties, which was ended by the rise of the Turks. At that time, the Rouran people who believed in heavy armor and concentrated formation charging - and they were all masters of top equestrian skills who could charge and shoot arrows at the same time - were beaten to a pulp by the Turkic cavalry.
From then on, it slowly withdrew from the Chinese war stage.
The second time was at the junction of the Southern and Northern Song Dynasties. The famous Iron Buddha Temple of the Jin Dynasty at that time was a strict, dense, heavily armored and neat cavalry charge. Frankly speaking, if we only talk about the neat and dense cavalry charge, the wall charge was used in modern times.
The tactical Western cuirassiers and even the simply unarmored Western cavalry are probably not as good as the Golden Soldier Iron Buddha, because the Iron Buddha is also called Lianma - you can imagine how dense their lineup is. However, the Iron Buddha was ended by the Wu brothers
Yu Monk Yuan!
The heavy armored cavalry in the European Middle Ages ended with the Mongol invasion and its aftermath. The Knights Templar and Teutonic Knights were annihilated, the Polish Legion was annihilated, and the Hungarian Heavy Cavalry was annihilated. These were all at that time
Europe's top heavy cavalry regiments all believe in charging in dense and orderly formations.
By the same token, the so-called light cavalry charge in a dense formation in the modern West with only a thin layer of breastplate, if not equipped with firearms that were ahead of its time, should not have any advantage at all when fighting the nomadic cavalry in the East.
Of course, in Gao Pragmatic's previous life, he had seen many foreign slaves on the Internet giving examples of modern Western cavalry defeating Eastern cavalry, but there was a problem of stealing concepts: basically none of the battle examples listed by foreign slaves could prove that modern European cavalry was based on the cavalry itself.
The superiority defeated the traditional cavalry in other areas.
It can be seen from Napoleon's evaluation that in terms of individual soldier quality, the French cavalry, which was the strongest in Europe during the same period, was not as good as the Mamluk cavalry. The way to victory was a matter of battlefield command, not the quality of the cavalry itself.
As for the cavalry in Turkey and Africa, they are not traditional archer cavalry. Their cavalry weapons are scimitars. Compared with the cavalry armed with spears, who has a stronger impact? Is this still necessary to debate? Before modern times, it was
Similarly, there is no question of modern or ancient times. Both have their own advantages. The key is the issue of command and use, which is related to the quality of the commander.
As for the Qing Dynasty, the European cavalry was already equipped with firearms. That was a problem of the use of firearms and a gap in weapons. This advantage was not limited to cavalry, but covered the gap in weapons between the entire Eastern and Western armies.
There is another battle example. The foreign slaves themselves said that the Sikh cavalry was defeated by the Bengal cavalry. In other battle cases, the victory was obviously won by the European infantry's machine guns, not the cavalry, and everyone knows that the machine gun is the nemesis of the cavalry in the narrow sense.
Regarding the war between Russia and Turkey, everyone knows that it was Russia, not Turkey, that lost on the battlefield.
Similarly, how many cavalrymen of European ancestry did the Russian Cossack cavalry, who clearly had "oriental ancestry", torture on the European battlefields?
Therefore, Gao Pragmatic has always believed that the so-called advantages and disadvantages of Eastern and Western cavalry are related to the level of weapons and armor determined by the level of science and technology at that time, the terrain where the battle takes place, the accompanying level of infantry coordination, and the organizational form of the state power of the era.
Also relevant.
In a nutshell: no one military unit can conquer the world.
You can't use the Mangujie, which was once invincible in field battles, to attack a city, right? Even the same Mongolian cavalry was driven back to his hometown by Zhu Yuanzhang seventy years later, and then was pinned to the ground and beaten again and again by Zhu Di.
Therefore, after much thought, Gao Pragmatic finally felt that the root cause of the lack of outstanding performance of his cavalry was nothing more than two points: first, there were too few formal actual combats, and second, the equipment was not adequate.
The Ma family's elite soldiers are all elites from hundreds of battles. They are the real gold left behind after countless wars. Apart from the Gao family's cavalrymen who own about half of the original Bailixia bandit horses, the other recruits are all recruited from the border areas.
, their actual combat experience is either pitiful or zero. When they first participate in a war, isn't it normal for them to have higher casualties than the Majia soldiers?
After understanding this truth, Gao Jingjing finally freed himself from the tangle in his head.
We should find more ways to let our servants participate in the war, rather than really using them as servants to look after the home. Although this will definitely cause casualties and increase the financial burden - Gao Pragmatic just learned about Ma Wei's so-called pension
The amount of money and rewards was simply not comparable to the standards he had set. Therefore, of the fifty-three servants he lost, Ma Wei's pensions and rewards only accounted for one-third, and he got the remaining two-thirds.
Gao Pragmatic subsidized it himself, so Gao Shidu, who suffered a huge loss, will be depressed all day today.
But when Gao pragmatically figured it out, he still insisted on his previous point of view: any problem that money can solve is not a problem, because although I am not good at practicing cavalry, I am good at making money!
A cavalryman died in battle, and Ma Wei only spent less than 20 taels to complete the pension. Including the loss of the horse, it was only about 30 taels... Would Gao Shidu, who was making money every day, care about this amount? Even if he paid according to the
The standard he set for his own cavalry was that each cavalry died in battle and received a one-time pension of up to fifty taels. Including the horses, it was only sixty taels. Today's loss of fifty-three cavalrymen, even if he had to bear all of it himself, in fact
