3 ms·
That battle was a terrible representation of medieval warfare. And it was still one of the better representations of the entire show.
by tmpz22 4y ago
That battle was a terrible representation of medieval warfare. And it was still one of the better representations of the entire show.
- OJFord 4y agoIs there a similar show without the fantasy/supernatural elements that you might recommend, if you see what I mean? I don't need it to be historically accurate (if anything I'd prefer it didn't even pretend to be about 'Romans' or whatever, like GoT doesn't, since then there's an historical truth for it to (likely) miss) but the more GoT went on the more dragony, visiony, giants-y, etc. it seemed to get, and while I enjoyed it I do find it harder to engage (or perhaps rather easier to disengage, take a while to get into, etc.) with that sort of stuff.
- danenania 4y ago'Vikings' is great. It has many battles and focuses a lot on strategy and tactics. It has a touch of the supernatural since it's based on the Icelandic sagas, but it's a fairly minor element.
- tmp_anon_22 4y agoHBO's Rome is pretty good, but only two seasons. Its from the mid 00s.
- the_biot 4y agoIt really was terrible, but the aspect of the fighters getting pushed ever closer together, to the point where it's hard to watch it's so terrifying, really did happen. The battle of Cannae was apparently like that, where soldiers were so terrified they started digging holes to crawl into. The article mentions this as possibly one of the things that make a flanking attack so terrifying -- it would squish the ranks together in a way that a frontal attack didn't.