From: Charles MIALARET (Charles.Mialaret@steria.fr)
Date: Thu 06 Apr 2000 - 21:59:15 EEST
Il s'agit d'un message multivolet au format MIME.
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Andreas Mueller Wrote:
>Sorry to meddle in this thread. I'm not quite sure, why the Lunar army
>should be superior.
>They are not like the roman army at all, because of their use of
Well I don't really agree with you there. I think Lunar have one very
point in common with the Roman: They have a _regular_ army with what it
ability to work in formations, coordination of formations (even called
training, logistics, military science and history, I imagine too
that they have a pioneer corp etc.
>The use of scimitars would result in a less dense packed
>formation (otherwise one would hit his neighbour or break up the
>formation to have more space) and so one of the major advantages of
>spearformations, density, would be lost.
AFAIK, there are lots of variety in the Lunar army, not only scimitar
Further more the spanish tercio sounded the end of the High middle
Pike formation with a mixure of weapon among which the short sword and
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Description: Carte pour Charles, Mialaret
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
fn: Mialaret Charles
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Fri 13 Jun 2003 - 21:14:53 EEST