Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EnigmaticHat]

The best way I've heard later-period cavalry described is that there was still the need in warfare for a cavalry unit, but horse cavalry were no longer up to the task.

...and that's why WW1 lasted so long.  Also the reason why literal horse cavalry units were still being deployed in WW1.  Hilariously enough, also in WW2, although I assume those dismounted before entering combat.  Although now I'm imaging Russian cavalry engaging German tanks from horseback with AT weapons.

[Descan]

The best way I've heard later-period cavalry described is that there was still the need in warfare for a cavalry unit, but horse cavalry were no longer up to the task.

I'm now imagining a world where genetic engineering came around 5 centuries early, and later-period cavalry units started riding mutant houndbeasts from Hell.

[Gunner-Chan]

Well near Krojanty in 1939 polish calvary rather famously decimated an infantry unit, but got chased away by an advancing group of armor scouts. So there was still some use to them. They actually carried anti tank rifles along with their other weapons too.

[Orange Wizard]

Cavalry were normally used for flanking and harassing the sides/back of an army, because charging the front tended to get your horses riddled with bullets and cannonballs.
They're pretty powerful in the right place, but you get a better manpower:money ratio by just handing out guns to a bunch of dudes and telling them to walk in a line.

You try hitting a horse with a fekking cannon. Thing is gonna move, especially with some Knight asshole on the back. What is he doing? It's the 21st century, you pothead! Get off that horse and get a JOB already!

Fun fact: The NZ army currently has a horse-mounted cavalry regiment.

[Amperzand]

Spoiler: The solution to cavalry, circa 1890 (click to show/hide)

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, I can see properly armed cavalry operating as rapid scouts or anti-vehicle teams in conditions similar to the inter-war period, where the doctrine of mobility has started to resurface but vehicles are still not incredibly reliable, fuel is relatively scarce, and roads tend to be very rough (by modern standards). The problem is that that's not really where they saw use; WWI was a continuation and worsening of the military paradigm which had persisted since the Renaissance (in the sense of being extremely hostile to cavalry--the advent of cannons shifted things away from static defenses, but the advances that piled up prior to WWI pushed things back in the other direction). Meanwhile, when WWII came around, armored vehicles had become reliable enough to replace cavalry on the ground, and aircraft were likewise advanced enough to cover any gaps in those roles while adding other uses.

Basically by WWII horse cavalry simply had newer, better alternatives for every role, except as an element in partisan warfare where the horses are used as cross-country transport but the fighters dismount well before battle.

[Culise]

Besides, you're normally not trying to hit one horse with one cannon.  You're normally firing a whole battery of artillery at a charging regiment of cavalry, which is a distinctly bigger target with much more chances to hit *something* worthwhile. 

But yeah, cavalry still exists even today.  A few parade regiments aside, it mostly just rides in helicopters or tanks rather than being little squishies on bigger squishies.  As Flying Dice says, the interwar period mostly saw cavalry relegated to dragoon status.  This sort of use is also where the myth of Polish cavalry charging German tanks came from, but Gunner-Chan also already brought the reality behind the myth to light.  Horses also continued to see use in logistics where they preferably weren't being shot at on a regular basis unless things went distinctly sour (the Germans, for instance, had a much lower rate of mechanization than the vaunted origins of the blitzkrieg would suggest, bringing 600-700 thousand horses for Barbarossa).

[KingofstarrySkies]

Cavalry were normally used for flanking and harassing the sides/back of an army, because charging the front tended to get your horses riddled with bullets and cannonballs.
They're pretty powerful in the right place, but you get a better manpower:money ratio by just handing out guns to a bunch of dudes and telling them to walk in a line.

You try hitting a horse with a fekking cannon. Thing is gonna move, especially with some Knight asshole on the back. What is he doing? It's the 21st century, you pothead! Get off that horse and get a JOB already!

Fun fact: The NZ army currently has a horse-mounted cavalry regiment.

Point stands: NZ army needs to get a job.

[flabort]

Royal Canadian Mounted Police?

[hops]

I assume they ride geese instead.

[Orange Wizard]

Moose, actually.

[KingofstarrySkies]

...do
Do you think they actually ride the horses much anymore? Any time they do it's in the places you can't exactly get a car to. As far as I'm aware, that title is a formality.
As for riding moose, that would kill you. The moose would instead attempt to ride you.

[O.Wilde]

Attempt and succeed.

[hops]

As for riding moose, that would kill you. The moose would instead attempt to ride you.

[Amperzand]

It would be sort of like hot newfoundland-on-chihuahua action.