Obviously you can’t just have hundreds to thousands of people from both sides swinging at each other aimlessly, the massacre would be ridiculous and plus that just seems dumb. Movies always show it as massive groups running across a field and falling on each other’s swords. The front line is guaranteed to die and the back can’t do anything, and I’m sure trampling your own men would be an issue. How did armies actually engage each other?
In: 4
Formations and shield walls were used throughout history. Different units would have different jobs. Typically Spearman and swordsman would make up front lines. Archers would be a separate protected element because they could fight at range. Cavalry was king but expensive and vulnerable to certain weapons and tactics. Siege weapons were yet another segment. A general existed to call the different elements and units into action. Chain of command existed to make sure everyone was organized into doing thier jobs. Once combat starts chaos is inevitable but more disciplined and organized troops would still be able to function under fire so to speak. Now keep in mind I’m describing a professional well organized well funded army which did exist throughout history but there were plenty of fights between militias, bandit, irregular troops, barbarians, and other disorganized rabbles.
If you didn’t have the training or soldiers things would often be a numbers game. The whole point of professional armies and soldiers is that keeping them organized and doing teamwork meant you could defeat larger forces and defeat same size forces with far fewer casualties
Latest Answers