> Nothing anachronistic about it; this is likely an optimal design when considering how to maximise the effective coverage of guns. I guess what makes it sligh

> Nothing anachronistic about it; this is likely an optimal design when considering how to maximise the effective coverage of guns. I guess what makes it slightly anachronistic is that these "pointy" designs look like they are somehow designed with fluid or aero-dynamics in mind, and back in the days I guess they were when an amassing army would literally try and storm the walls. In that situation, you want the opposing army to be forced against a point rather than a flat wall so that every flat wall they attack, they are flanked by another one right next to it, creating a "kill zone". While I'm sure the design is by no means "useless" by today's standards, I have to wonder if the original intent of the design makes sense in an era of air strikes and tanks. But then again, if you're up against a less advanced adversary, maybe "storming the gates" is literally what they'll be forced to attempt.