Normally I check out the original video but... man this one felt like it was written by AI. Or written to specifically farm engagement via corrections or people being angry at it. Also seems solely focused on Europe rather than stuff from other parts of the world, and also just skips a few thousand years of history as well? Sure there might be less clear records from earlier centuries, but they could easily do like... 8th-4th century BCE or something like that. This is one I'd pass on if it wasn't for Mr. Terry's commentary.
Def a slop AI video. Like putting the Scorpion as the strongest weapon of the 2ND century - The Romans had already started the using of catapults- but putting catapults as the strongest weapon of the 8ND century 😂😂😂.
Disclaimer, the ranking you reacted to was made by an AI, the person who posted the video even states that in the comment section. Which is why you might see some strange choices in this list.
I would argue that maybe some more of the naval technology could have made it onto the list. The 'Ship of the Line' was a game changer and in modern times an Aircraft Carrier is a hell of a lot more useful than a nuke.
About the Pilum: According to Peter Connolly's book "Greece and Rome at War," some versions of the pilum were weighted by a lead ball to increase penetrative power. However, these've only been seen in paintings and wall carvings, and no actual examples have been found at archaeology sites (so far).
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's heavily interested in military history and weaponry in diachronic and comparative perspective I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt's content. Lesser know channel but a veritable hidden gem Art of War wise
Answer for your first question: the ball on the pilum serves a couple of purposes. First, it puts weight directly behind the part of the weapon that you want to stick in the enemy. Second, since the metal end of the weapon is going to naturally bend a bit on impact, the weight behind it is going to want to keep moving forward (because physics) which will cause the end to either bend permanently or break. Think about this: if you put a bowling ball on the end of a pool cue and dropped it from a window, when the tip of the cue hits the ground, the bowling ball is going to want to keep going straight down. It will end up having to veer off one way or the other, but not before breaking the cue. It's also going to make the tip of the cue hit with a LOT more force.
There's the famous siege tower with battering ram in the 1st century, during the siege of Masada. A mini series with Peter O'Toole has been made about that historical battle between the Jews and the Romans. Was an impressive moment when the siege tower (which had been made in secret) was rolled out and pulled up the constructed hill to reach the fortress.
Skipped over tanks, AirCrafts, rifling, TNT, the modern pointed tip bullet. I mean trully so much that could of been mentioned that seems minor but really was a big deal. Even clothing going from Colored reds whites greens and all sorts of European styles of uniforms to the modern draws to help blend into the terrain.
I have two critiques. The long bow wasn't inherently more powerful than short bows. However a long bow is easier to make than a short bow of equal poundage. As far as the 20th and 21st century go. I go with Bombers for the 20th and Drones for the 21. Not only were the only two nukes used in war delivered by bomber, but far more death and destruction as been caused by conventional bombs dropped from bombers than both nukes. Thou still early in the 20th century, drones are becoming more and more prevalent and lethal on the battlefield.
It depends on how you view it, a longbow was obviously more powerful than the "normal" average shorter bows being used, but it wasn't necessarily more powerful than the most powerful shorter composite/recurve bows
I would agree with you in saying that drones are more effective in the 21st century. But I would say that nukes are still more powerful. By the times the bombs were dropped on Japan, everyone knew that a nuclear war would be game over and didn't want to use them. Bombers were effective, yes, but the nukes were a terrifyingly efficient weapon that could level whole communities, especially with the I production of Hydrogen bombs and the Tsar Bomba
I'd say the 15th century was past the heyday of the longbow. It had dominated English wars with France and Scotland in the 14th (and I'd be happy to put it in there) but by the 15th century we English had almost made it into a fetish which *had* to be used in the traditional manner as that was the way to win battles. As was proved by the French and Swiss, it was no longer a battle-winning weapon/tactic. I also wish he'd been a little less Euro-centric and not included both siege and naval warfare, and made the focus on land battles. So where I'd go would be: 1st century - composite bow in the hands of a guy on a horse 2nd-12th century - still the same 13th century - no change yet, although crossbows are a real problem for the pony boys 14th century - Longbow 15th century - early cannon 16th century - pike, more than the aruebus, the cannon or the cavalry, the clash of pikes was what won land battles (I know he includes sea battles so maybe there's a better case for both cannon and arquebus due to that). 17th century - wheellock pistol - a feature of battles in that century is that infantry fights were rarely decisive or quick, and winning the cavalry engagement so you could launch flank attacks on engaged infantry was a very important way to win battles. And And the key cavalry weapon was the pistol. 18th century - musket. This is the century of the musket duel, of infantry being the most decisive arm, with few exceptions until very late in the century when massed cannon start to be a key component of tactics. 19th centurry - artillery. From Napoleon's Grand Batteries and their counterparts in other armies to the rifled breech-loaders of the late century (both on land and sea), Concentrate your guns, batter down the enemy artillery, and it's very easy to break through the lines of infantry you bombard. Until the 1880s when armies start to issue spades. 20th century - air power. Nuclear weapons aren't much use if you have to deliver them by hand (or even artillery piece) and air power has in reality been used far mor often to great effect. Siege warfare 1st-14th century - disease and famine 15th century onwards - cannon
The Honjo Masamune was the greatest Blade ever forged. I put a video on your discord about it with an explanation of it, I really hope you react to it soon. It is such a good story it has and it might be out there and found one day in America, not in Japan.
in a way i can understand why the Longbow was the most powerful weapon of the 15th century, yea it required a lot more training then a crossbow, but the point was you arent loosing those experienced long bowmen because wile the knights are fighting an army, on the other side of the forest to your right theres the longbowmen shooting in the general direction of the enemy, too far away for the enemy to even know they are there, wich means wile their crossbow men are in full view of your cavalry, your longbowmen are practically outside of the battle just providing support, the equivalent of having bomber support in modern warfare basically i think the reason he doesnt even consider Cannons its because they werent used that much, EVEN for sieges, like to be fair Cannons were heavy, and can only shoot in one direction, they were most likely the equivalent of a Ballista, so i can imagine compared to those other weapons the Cannon just isnt as impressive as when you put it alongside other battles it falls short, for example in an open field battle the cannon is mostly a nuisance, taking out only a line of enemies when fired and since it most likely took a wile tor reload and fire, in most battles they were rather useless as they could be taken cared of by ranged units, and cavalry, historically speaking cavalry often dealt with cannons quite easily and with ranged weapons i mean you technically just have to deal with the men manning those cannons, so i can understand why cannons werent considered that powerfull, specaily when pinned against other weapons that had greater range like the trebuchet or as the guy mentioned the longbow, it was only after a more automatic way of reloating was invented that cannons had a greater chance against enemies, and with the invention of the musket, greater defence, plus with greater range the cannon practically turned into the artillery so it took a wile for cannons to become reliable really
I'd have to say that the missile is the most important weapon of the 20-21st century, which of course includes nuclear weapons. But on it's own only 2 nuclear weapons have ever been used. To great effect yes, but still only twice. Missiles however, are the mainstay and most important weapon in every conflict over the last 60 years....whether from plane, ship or land.
I said close to the same but split it with the Airplane for the 20th and guided rockets for the 21st as most rockets were like the nukes delivered by aircraft (and a few ships) and only as of the 80's have they started to become the main independent weapon.
Did you say that machine guns ended trench warfare? I thought it was basically the opposite and it brought about trench warfare because moving troops in the open was just begging to have them all mowed down. I know trenches were used before the machine gun a lot more commonly than most people think, especially in sieges, but my understanding was always that machine guns made them an absolute necessity in combat.
I would replace the nuke with the airplane, that was used far more and required to deliver the two nukes used in war. A nuke has yet to deliver itself in war though it can now as part of a rocket. Perhaps even splitting the 20th and 21st centuries with the Air plane and the modern guided rocket. The 80's and 90's being the real transition to rockets overcoming planes as the top weapon. I think his bias against Cannon until later is their limits earlier as cannon made a hole but it was still the troops with small arms to take advantage of it on land or sea. Early Cannon were too heavy and big for mass offensive uses but were more for defense of forts or making breaches in walls or lines. Until the Maxum infantry ruled the battlefield as calvary couldn't take massed infantry and artillery was too slow to defend against it. Not really a bad list but it could be better, also many weapons show up at different times depending on the region. This did seemed western civilization (EUROPE) centered.
I feel like Missles as a whole would be better than specifically nukes. Nukes are strong, but have very little actual deaths tied go them compared to other weapons.
Historical Trivia: The crossbow is the *ONLY* weapon to ever be officially banned by the Pope. In 1139, Pope Innocent II convened the Second Lateran Council; the crossbow was the sniper rifle of its era, with range and accuracy that enabled an untrained peasant to instantly slay a professional soldier with impunity and there was virtually no defense against it. Of course, this ban only applied to crossbows being used against Christians - they could still freely be used against Saracens and other heathens.
The ball on the pilum is a weight yes, so if it was thrown, and someone blocked it, it would make the shield more cumbersome. Edit: The most powerful weapon of the 21st century is the ability to control the flow of information
I feel power is subjective. Like a nuclear weapon is the greatest power we ever developed but they have only ever been used 2 in combat. However, an aircraft carrier is used far more often and probably the most effective weapon used on a daily basis. And it then you have the patriot system… Russia is learning this learned the hard way.
Long bow, short bow and crossbow. All of these weapons are equally dangerous and powerful. It's all a matter of the situation, the location of the fight, etc. --------------------- In the 21st century as nuclear weapons are paradoxically so dangerous that no one will use them I think a Drone with mounted weapons is the most dangerous. Now we can easily watch battlefield footage. Such drone though unassuming poses a great threat. And if not a drone with weapons then this kind of aircraft that flies very high and fast. It has various weapons at its disposal and is hard to detect. And if that doesn't fit either then hackers. In the era of computerization, digitization, all it takes is a very capable hacker who can mess up a lot.
The video seemed to be very Euro-centric. You even noted that nowhere in the list was the compound or recurve bows. That speaks to an unstated bias on the part of the creator.
"Greek Fire is super cool" ...no. no, it really wasn't. And that's just how we liked it :D Also, the proper name is "liquid fire" and it also came in handheld version for extra fun! And one of the models they show for a battering ram is ancient Greek...
Yeah i wouldn't be looking at this channel in the future. Just using AI for engagement farming. Honestly the voice even sounds to be AI generated as its putting emphasis on the wrong words.
I would assume it'll have many claws and teeth in the BCE centuries, maybe some poisons? Hm, okay it starts with the 1st century in the CE... so skipping ahead already from the beginning of weapons, OV (original video) guy must have been lazy xD. Like, okay maybe not use natural weapons but the first man made ones, so like rocks and clubs and the like....dang did I use many likes xD
Ignoring the fact that it's an AI vomiting aggressively on itself, the sword was never, by any stretch of the imagination, one of the most powerful weapons of any century. They were side-arms, fashion statements and status symbols, the latter two being why the modern world is so obsessed with them. A sword, even the rare big, two handed kind, never compared to pole arms, ranged weapons or siege weapons of their times. Even putting the "viking axe" (good job AI, you didn't even name a thing) on the list was a failure. At best it was naming the Dane Axe, a pole axe, though even that wouldn't really sit at the top of the list.
Oh god, here we go... comparing spears with ships, randomly assigning ancient weapons to centuries, equalling the World with Europe... smh. I strongly recommend to stay clear of the oc, he clearly is just a badly informed roman/viking weeb geeking out about their weapons and even making false claims on some of them
Unfortunately this video is a bullshit! As Terry point out, many of those inventions show up before and basically were forced into narrative. Especially Longbow is really bad! Only advantage of Longbow was that it was cheaper and easier to make then modre advanced composite bows. But thing is that they were not better! In fact when battle of Augicourt happen, it did work only because French ignored English Archers as obsolete and most of job was done in hand to hand combat anyway. In 15'th century we literally did have Hussite Wars, what become famous from use of battle wagons, armed in cannons and hand cannons (because yes, guns were a thing in medieval times). Longbow is probably one of most overrated weapons ever!
Thanks for continuing updates & I'd rather trade the stock market as it's more profitable. I make an average of $34,500 per week even though I barely trade myself.
I would have put airplanes for the 20th century and maybe aircraft carriers for the 21st century. Airplanes have been a game changer, and a fully loaded aircraft carrier is the biggest force delivery mechanism on the planet. Though I guess you could compare an aircraft carrier with a modern Ohio class nuclear submarine with it's full payload of trident ICBMs. One's flashy and great for PR while the other is a total nightmare hellspawn ready to end everything you ever knew and you'd never see it coming. I wouldn't have given it to just nukes themselves though for 20th-21st century. Seems like just a meme cop out to me.
Normally I check out the original video but... man this one felt like it was written by AI. Or written to specifically farm engagement via corrections or people being angry at it.
Also seems solely focused on Europe rather than stuff from other parts of the world, and also just skips a few thousand years of history as well? Sure there might be less clear records from earlier centuries, but they could easily do like... 8th-4th century BCE or something like that.
This is one I'd pass on if it wasn't for Mr. Terry's commentary.
That is cause it was made by an AI sadly
Def a slop AI video. Like putting the Scorpion as the strongest weapon of the 2ND century - The Romans had already started the using of catapults- but putting catapults as the strongest weapon of the 8ND century 😂😂😂.
Written, read and probably even published by an AI. I was hoping Mr. Terry would catch on to that at some point.
@@NordProductions can't tell if sarcastic or a really bad attempt at trolling.
Gonna assume the former.
@@w1q2e3r4t5 to be fair he didnt talk about war elephants
I'd say the nuke is up there
Hot take, nukes are obsolete and dumb.
Facts lol
That or maybe the boot knife..
Nuke has the lowest body count of any weapon in history. Due to its ability to have the highest by orders of magnitude if used.
@@richardwallis9374 knife missile. Nukes are obsolete thanks to precision weapons.
Disclaimer, the ranking you reacted to was made by an AI, the person who posted the video even states that in the comment section. Which is why you might see some strange choices in this list.
I dont need AI crap on history. I want real historian to rank weapons
I would argue that maybe some more of the naval technology could have made it onto the list. The 'Ship of the Line' was a game changer and in modern times an Aircraft Carrier is a hell of a lot more useful than a nuke.
So what is a "weapon?"
Sure it's more useful but is it more "Powerful"
About the Pilum:
According to Peter Connolly's book "Greece and Rome at War," some versions of the pilum were weighted by a lead ball to increase penetrative power.
However, these've only been seen in paintings and wall carvings, and no actual examples have been found at archaeology sites (so far).
Some of these I disagree with so much 😂😂 like how is a battering ram the most powerful weapon in the 11th century ?? They’ve been used for ever
I mean we still use them in firefighters and police
So has the catapult, ballista, etc. It's just chatgpt garbage.
You can 100% tell this was chatgpt.
Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's heavily interested in military history and weaponry in diachronic and comparative perspective I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt's content. Lesser know channel but a veritable hidden gem Art of War wise
Pretty sure longbow was being used in 1300s it was used by Scotts and English.
Spread contemporary siege weapons too much and ruined the list
Answer for your first question: the ball on the pilum serves a couple of purposes. First, it puts weight directly behind the part of the weapon that you want to stick in the enemy. Second, since the metal end of the weapon is going to naturally bend a bit on impact, the weight behind it is going to want to keep moving forward (because physics) which will cause the end to either bend permanently or break.
Think about this: if you put a bowling ball on the end of a pool cue and dropped it from a window, when the tip of the cue hits the ground, the bowling ball is going to want to keep going straight down. It will end up having to veer off one way or the other, but not before breaking the cue. It's also going to make the tip of the cue hit with a LOT more force.
Thank you for clarifying. That makes total sense!
There's the famous siege tower with battering ram in the 1st century, during the siege of Masada. A mini series with Peter O'Toole has been made about that historical battle between the Jews and the Romans. Was an impressive moment when the siege tower (which had been made in secret) was rolled out and pulled up the constructed hill to reach the fortress.
Skipped over tanks, AirCrafts, rifling, TNT, the modern pointed tip bullet. I mean trully so much that could of been mentioned that seems minor but really was a big deal. Even clothing going from Colored reds whites greens and all sorts of European styles of uniforms to the modern draws to help blend into the terrain.
I have two critiques. The long bow wasn't inherently more powerful than short bows. However a long bow is easier to make than a short bow of equal poundage. As far as the 20th and 21st century go. I go with Bombers for the 20th and Drones for the 21. Not only were the only two nukes used in war delivered by bomber, but far more death and destruction as been caused by conventional bombs dropped from bombers than both nukes. Thou still early in the 20th century, drones are becoming more and more prevalent and lethal on the battlefield.
It depends on how you view it, a longbow was obviously more powerful than the "normal" average shorter bows being used, but it wasn't necessarily more powerful than the most powerful shorter composite/recurve bows
I would agree with you in saying that drones are more effective in the 21st century. But I would say that nukes are still more powerful. By the times the bombs were dropped on Japan, everyone knew that a nuclear war would be game over and didn't want to use them. Bombers were effective, yes, but the nukes were a terrifyingly efficient weapon that could level whole communities, especially with the I production of Hydrogen bombs and the Tsar Bomba
"The Most Powerful Weapon of Every Century"
Just have the spear for like 95k years
The Scorpion/Balista have also been known to throw large rocks.
Seige warfare is mostly about starving out the enemy, the weapons change, but the tactics don’t.
I'd say the 15th century was past the heyday of the longbow. It had dominated English wars with France and Scotland in the 14th (and I'd be happy to put it in there) but by the 15th century we English had almost made it into a fetish which *had* to be used in the traditional manner as that was the way to win battles. As was proved by the French and Swiss, it was no longer a battle-winning weapon/tactic.
I also wish he'd been a little less Euro-centric and not included both siege and naval warfare, and made the focus on land battles.
So where I'd go would be:
1st century - composite bow in the hands of a guy on a horse
2nd-12th century - still the same
13th century - no change yet, although crossbows are a real problem for the pony boys
14th century - Longbow
15th century - early cannon
16th century - pike, more than the aruebus, the cannon or the cavalry, the clash of pikes was what won land battles (I know he includes sea battles so maybe there's a better case for both cannon and arquebus due to that).
17th century - wheellock pistol - a feature of battles in that century is that infantry fights were rarely decisive or quick, and winning the cavalry engagement so you could launch flank attacks on engaged infantry was a very important way to win battles. And And the key cavalry weapon was the pistol.
18th century - musket. This is the century of the musket duel, of infantry being the most decisive arm, with few exceptions until very late in the century when massed cannon start to be a key component of tactics.
19th centurry - artillery. From Napoleon's Grand Batteries and their counterparts in other armies to the rifled breech-loaders of the late century (both on land and sea), Concentrate your guns, batter down the enemy artillery, and it's very easy to break through the lines of infantry you bombard. Until the 1880s when armies start to issue spades.
20th century - air power. Nuclear weapons aren't much use if you have to deliver them by hand (or even artillery piece) and air power has in reality been used far mor often to great effect.
Siege warfare
1st-14th century - disease and famine
15th century onwards - cannon
The Honjo Masamune was the greatest Blade ever forged. I put a video on your discord about it with an explanation of it, I really hope you react to it soon. It is such a good story it has and it might be out there and found one day in America, not in Japan.
in a way i can understand why the Longbow was the most powerful weapon of the 15th century, yea it required a lot more training then a crossbow, but the point was you arent loosing those experienced long bowmen because wile the knights are fighting an army, on the other side of the forest to your right theres the longbowmen shooting in the general direction of the enemy, too far away for the enemy to even know they are there, wich means wile their crossbow men are in full view of your cavalry, your longbowmen are practically outside of the battle just providing support, the equivalent of having bomber support in modern warfare basically
i think the reason he doesnt even consider Cannons its because they werent used that much, EVEN for sieges, like to be fair Cannons were heavy, and can only shoot in one direction, they were most likely the equivalent of a Ballista, so i can imagine compared to those other weapons the Cannon just isnt as impressive as when you put it alongside other battles it falls short, for example in an open field battle the cannon is mostly a nuisance, taking out only a line of enemies when fired and since it most likely took a wile tor reload and fire, in most battles they were rather useless as they could be taken cared of by ranged units, and cavalry, historically speaking cavalry often dealt with cannons quite easily and with ranged weapons i mean you technically just have to deal with the men manning those cannons, so i can understand why cannons werent considered that powerfull, specaily when pinned against other weapons that had greater range like the trebuchet or as the guy mentioned the longbow, it was only after a more automatic way of reloating was invented that cannons had a greater chance against enemies, and with the invention of the musket, greater defence, plus with greater range the cannon practically turned into the artillery so it took a wile for cannons to become reliable really
Anyone else notice he's playing the music from the SS marching song Erica in the background as he's narrating?
The ballista and scorpions would be great for a siege...as a defensive weapon. Not sure where it would be useful in assault.
I'd have to say that the missile is the most important weapon of the 20-21st century, which of course includes nuclear weapons. But on it's own only 2 nuclear weapons have ever been used. To great effect yes, but still only twice.
Missiles however, are the mainstay and most important weapon in every conflict over the last 60 years....whether from plane, ship or land.
I said close to the same but split it with the Airplane for the 20th and guided rockets for the 21st as most rockets were like the nukes delivered by aircraft (and a few ships) and only as of the 80's have they started to become the main independent weapon.
"Whatever happens, we have got
The Maxim Gun, and they have not."
Did you say that machine guns ended trench warfare? I thought it was basically the opposite and it brought about trench warfare because moving troops in the open was just begging to have them all mowed down. I know trenches were used before the machine gun a lot more commonly than most people think, especially in sieges, but my understanding was always that machine guns made them an absolute necessity in combat.
I would replace the nuke with the airplane, that was used far more and required to deliver the two nukes used in war. A nuke has yet to deliver itself in war though it can now as part of a rocket. Perhaps even splitting the 20th and 21st centuries with the Air plane and the modern guided rocket. The 80's and 90's being the real transition to rockets overcoming planes as the top weapon. I think his bias against Cannon until later is their limits earlier as cannon made a hole but it was still the troops with small arms to take advantage of it on land or sea. Early Cannon were too heavy and big for mass offensive uses but were more for defense of forts or making breaches in walls or lines. Until the Maxum infantry ruled the battlefield as calvary couldn't take massed infantry and artillery was too slow to defend against it. Not really a bad list but it could be better, also many weapons show up at different times depending on the region. This did seemed western civilization (EUROPE) centered.
I feel like Missles as a whole would be better than specifically nukes. Nukes are strong, but have very little actual deaths tied go them compared to other weapons.
Historical Trivia: The crossbow is the *ONLY* weapon to ever be officially banned by the Pope. In 1139, Pope Innocent II convened the Second Lateran Council; the crossbow was the sniper rifle of its era, with range and accuracy that enabled an untrained peasant to instantly slay a professional soldier with impunity and there was virtually no defense against it. Of course, this ban only applied to crossbows being used against Christians - they could still freely be used against Saracens and other heathens.
The quill/pen is the most deadly object.
Dont take this list too seriously, apparently the list is AI generated/curated.
Mr terry never fails to make me do my homework
XVI century the Nau or the Galleon. Remembering the Botafogo.
Watch something from forgotten weapons and it will be more interesting.
Greek fire reminds me of Napalm of the day in composition
Ben Hur (1959) has a pretty good trireme battle
This century is likely the drone aircraft
This is why you don't mix siege weapons and infantry weapons. Two incompatible things.
AirPower and battleships should have been there and rather than a single item perhaps a list of improved weapons may have been more accurate
The ball on the pilum is a weight yes, so if it was thrown, and someone blocked it, it would make the shield more cumbersome.
Edit: The most powerful weapon of the 21st century is the ability to control the flow of information
I feel power is subjective. Like a nuclear weapon is the greatest power we ever developed but they have only ever been used 2 in combat. However, an aircraft carrier is used far more often and probably the most effective weapon used on a daily basis. And it then you have the patriot system… Russia is learning this learned the hard way.
Long bow, short bow and crossbow. All of these weapons are equally dangerous and powerful. It's all a matter of the situation, the location of the fight, etc.
---------------------
In the 21st century as nuclear weapons are paradoxically so dangerous that no one will use them I think a Drone with mounted weapons is the most dangerous. Now we can easily watch battlefield footage. Such drone though unassuming poses a great threat. And if not a drone with weapons then this kind of aircraft that flies very high and fast. It has various weapons at its disposal and is hard to detect. And if that doesn't fit either then hackers. In the era of computerization, digitization, all it takes is a very capable hacker who can mess up a lot.
This may be me, but I believe horses and aircraft would be great weapons for the video.
The guy who made this video made a video on weird weapons
it stoick from how to train your dragon the catapolt is a early go to weapon for me to destroy enemy cities in civ games
Where airplane?
Umm I'm gonna make the argument that a Viking longship is not a weapon. It's just a very good vehicle.
This should be all spear until early modern times.
The video seemed to be very Euro-centric. You even noted that nowhere in the list was the compound or recurve bows. That speaks to an unstated bias on the part of the creator.
What kind of 2nd century forts are those?
I mean if we are talking most powerfull each century then it's gonna siege/naval artillery up until the A-bomb
No. Horses were the most powerful weapon in every century until roughly 1600.
Aircraft carriers and submarines
"Greek Fire is super cool"
...no. no, it really wasn't. And that's just how we liked it :D
Also, the proper name is "liquid fire" and it also came in handheld version for extra fun!
And one of the models they show for a battering ram is ancient Greek...
Making artillery a separate category would make this video reliable and immensely better
The video has 0 reliability to begin with.
Wasnt the Pilum designed to stick into the opponents shield and make their shield unwieldy.
When it didn't hit the enemy, but the shield, yes. Still a javelin tho
Supposedly mainly to pierce through the shield and right into the holder. But making it unwieldy surely Was a nice side effect
byantine flamerthrowers actually existed?
Yeah i wouldn't be looking at this channel in the future. Just using AI for engagement farming. Honestly the voice even sounds to be AI generated as its putting emphasis on the wrong words.
No slingers weapon
I would assume it'll have many claws and teeth in the BCE centuries, maybe some poisons? Hm, okay it starts with the 1st century in the CE... so skipping ahead already from the beginning of weapons, OV (original video) guy must have been lazy xD. Like, okay maybe not use natural weapons but the first man made ones, so like rocks and clubs and the like....dang did I use many likes xD
How could they put no swords
Ignoring the fact that it's an AI vomiting aggressively on itself, the sword was never, by any stretch of the imagination, one of the most powerful weapons of any century. They were side-arms, fashion statements and status symbols, the latter two being why the modern world is so obsessed with them.
A sword, even the rare big, two handed kind, never compared to pole arms, ranged weapons or siege weapons of their times. Even putting the "viking axe" (good job AI, you didn't even name a thing) on the list was a failure. At best it was naming the Dane Axe, a pole axe, though even that wouldn't really sit at the top of the list.
What about the F-22?
Stopped paying attention when they said Trireme in 3rd century AD. That was 600 year old tech by that point. This is a very badly generated AI list.
I don’t support ai created content
17:12 what do you mean? Trench warfare is still happening today in the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
This roman bias is insane :D
So not true at all.
Oh god, here we go... comparing spears with ships, randomly assigning ancient weapons to centuries, equalling the World with Europe... smh. I strongly recommend to stay clear of the oc, he clearly is just a badly informed roman/viking weeb geeking out about their weapons and even making false claims on some of them
This guy is all messed up.
Most powerful weapon of the 21st century: social media.
I don't think this video was very accurate lol
Unfortunately this video is a bullshit! As Terry point out, many of those inventions show up before and basically were forced into narrative. Especially Longbow is really bad! Only advantage of Longbow was that it was cheaper and easier to make then modre advanced composite bows. But thing is that they were not better! In fact when battle of Augicourt happen, it did work only because French ignored English Archers as obsolete and most of job was done in hand to hand combat anyway.
In 15'th century we literally did have Hussite Wars, what become famous from use of battle wagons, armed in cannons and hand cannons (because yes, guns were a thing in medieval times). Longbow is probably one of most overrated weapons ever!
The original video was bad
AI geneated carap with Nzi music playing
Bad video on that part. A bit inconsistent overall
Thanks for continuing updates & I'd rather trade the stock market as it's more profitable. I make an average of $34,500 per week even though I barely trade myself.
How please?
As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known crypto consultan
She is Expert Kathryn Friedman
Her name rings a bell; I've encountered it multiple times, usually associated with stories of her trading achievements. She deserves a lot of credit.
Sure! She interacts on what's Apk using the digit below👇
This video is so wrong, dear lord
This is just Eurocentric BS. This guy doesn't know what he is talking about.
I would have put airplanes for the 20th century and maybe aircraft carriers for the 21st century. Airplanes have been a game changer, and a fully loaded aircraft carrier is the biggest force delivery mechanism on the planet. Though I guess you could compare an aircraft carrier with a modern Ohio class nuclear submarine with it's full payload of trident ICBMs. One's flashy and great for PR while the other is a total nightmare hellspawn ready to end everything you ever knew and you'd never see it coming.
I wouldn't have given it to just nukes themselves though for 20th-21st century. Seems like just a meme cop out to me.
The ballista and scorpions would be great for a siege...as a defensive weapon. Not sure where it would be useful in assault.