We would basically have warhammer 40k style melee combat with dudes in power armor and chainswords.
@thatonekid640
5 жыл бұрын
QorinHalfhand. Chain swords are ineffective since it takes a long time to make a cut that a normal sword would do in an instant and swords aren’t effective against armor
@thatonekid640
5 жыл бұрын
*power armor and supersledges
@Jesus_Offical
4 жыл бұрын
exactly
@leobracken2316
4 жыл бұрын
@@thatonekid640 Well actually no, (if it has strong enough teeth and motor) a chainsword is actually more effective than a normal sword against armor. A sword is a large single hit easily deflected by armor but a chainsword as it hits causes hundred of small nics/dents that add up fast, with Every tiny hit pulling the chainsword further and further into the armor. Arch Warhammer did a video explaining it better, I recommend that. (Sorry if I appear "oh u wrong", that's not what I mean at all.)
@Trust751
4 жыл бұрын
@@leobracken2316 The significant problems are as you said; strong enough teeth and motor, but also the user's own ability to control the weapon. Even against relatively soft materials like wood, chainsaw teeth still blunt and break and both the chainsaw and what it's cutting through need to be held very firmly and carefully. Against hardened steel armour even the strongest chainsaw teeth we could make today would quickly break off and fly everywhere, becoming as much a hazard for the user as the target. And that's if the chain doesn't break or the chainsaw itself doesn't catch on something and tear itself out of the users hands (which is probably the most likely outcome). A regular sword by comparison is a single big blade and therefore has much greater structural integrity. Swords were never used to cut through armour (the only thing that could penetrate hardened steel armour would be a full swing with a heavy penetrating weapon like a halberd. Even then it isn't going to penetrate very far and will likely get stuck in the plate, so at most the weapon's lost and the opponent's been winded.) Fighting against a fully-armoured opponent usually involves bashing and wrestling them to the ground and then either restraining them or stabbing them through a gap like the visor. This is why maces and other percussive weapons are far more effective against fully armoured targets as they can transmit enough raw force to break bones even through armour plating. same as you. I'm just adding to the discussion :)
@MarcAlcatraz
8 жыл бұрын
imagine being the first victim of the first flamethrower, that mustve been the scariest thing
@MarcAlcatraz
8 жыл бұрын
Philly Cheese well i doubt the first "shot" would've been spot on accurate so like one min of full fear
@RC15O5
8 жыл бұрын
Ask the Arabs when they besieged Constantinople under Umayyad Caliph Mu'awiya. The Roman Empire was developing flamethrowers, which they called firethrowers, to combat their nemesis the persian Sassanid Empire, but before they could finish this secret weapon the Muslim Arabs finished their civil war and launched invasions into Erahnshar and Rhomania to conquer the Earth as they were taught to do so when they felt they had enough power to do so. Persia fell completely and Rome lost Egypt, Levant, Libya, and Karthage. By the time the Umayyad Caliphate had replaced the Rashidun Caliphate and besieged Constantinople (Roman Empire's capital at this time), they were already developing their firethrowers and eventually whipped them out and burned away the jihadist hordes.
@goblinguillaume
8 жыл бұрын
Mongol: My khal... the chinese, they have... they have... Khal: What do they have? Mongol: They have SICK FLAMETHROWERS!!
@MarcAlcatraz
8 жыл бұрын
Guillem Holmes Who Dragons on their shoulders!
@kevinazzinoth4547
8 жыл бұрын
+RC15O5 Not the same
@dougnapier6441
7 жыл бұрын
dude you could of had truck knights, imagine a dude with a lance in an ford f350 running over a confused aztec empire
@bobguylikescheese9878
7 жыл бұрын
that would be awesome. but it would probably be a truck chariot not a truck knight.
@dougnapier6441
7 жыл бұрын
i disagree you can't aim going 75 mph
@bobguylikescheese9878
7 жыл бұрын
i was thinking more of a scythed truck chariot for running thought troops
@ReasonableRadio
7 жыл бұрын
If we had combustion engines then we wouldn't need gunpowder that much anyway. We would probably have lots of hydrocarbon based weapons, some guns and lots of flamethrowers.
@bobguylikescheese9878
7 жыл бұрын
how would the guns work?
@brendonhavener
2 жыл бұрын
Without gunpowder and after electricity, I could see a “powered crossbow” that’s basically a rail gun being developed shortly after the invention of batteries.
@G0RSHK0V
2 жыл бұрын
Pneumatic guns is a better choice
@ASlickNamedPimpback
2 жыл бұрын
@@G0RSHK0V Agreed, even today we dont have railguns that are effective, but we had pneumatic guns since the civil war
@brendonhavener
2 жыл бұрын
@@G0RSHK0V fair enough
@Klaaism
2 жыл бұрын
Steam power is another possibility. aka steampunk
@ASlickNamedPimpback
2 жыл бұрын
@@Klaaism Eventually though they’d discover the superiority of oil and (after some time) nuclear power. Although, with the lack of gunpowder and therefore lack of explosives, I’m not sure if nukes would be invented
@nitronitrix4429
4 жыл бұрын
School Shooter: “Alright, imma light up the school.” *proceeds to load the catapult*
@pluggothesluggo5509
4 жыл бұрын
*school seige*
@arianas0714
4 жыл бұрын
Teachers: *YOU SHALL NOT PASS*
@ant9435
4 жыл бұрын
school stabing
@alphariusfuze8089
4 жыл бұрын
O h. G o d
@fa1con730
4 жыл бұрын
So this means schools would have to conduct seige drills lol.
@BizarreBits
8 жыл бұрын
They tried to make a potion for everlasting life, and created something that would end lives. Irony
@andrewmcginnis4149
8 жыл бұрын
Even if they had succeeded, they would've used the potion to end lives.
@luisalmodovar6548
8 жыл бұрын
+Fire Lord Sanders nope
@andrewmcginnis4149
8 жыл бұрын
Luis Almodovar They would use the potion on their own military and use it as an immoral weapon of war.
@e.r.8785
8 жыл бұрын
+Fire Lord Sanders IT'S THE EXTRA CRISPY COLONEL
@luisalmodovar6548
8 жыл бұрын
Fire Lord Sanders nope I'm pretty sure they can still die .........they would just live forever if no one kills them ........
@cpasr8065
3 жыл бұрын
1:02 ''In the grim darkness of the 9th Century, there is only war'' Ah, A man of Culture.
@Memeboi-bd8so
2 жыл бұрын
Can you explain the reference please? I don't know what it's from.
@lordicarus8807
2 жыл бұрын
@@Memeboi-bd8so Original quote: "“IN THE GRIM DARKNESS OF THE FAR FUTURE THERE IS ONLY WAR.”"
@Memeboi-bd8so
2 жыл бұрын
@Rolling Stone Thanks man
@kenyattaleefrazierIII
Жыл бұрын
@@lordicarus8807 when I originally watched this I didn't know it was a warhammer reference lol
@taddeus2832
Жыл бұрын
mate this whole video is full of 40k refferences
@PerfectAlibi1
5 жыл бұрын
We would've weaponized electricity alot more! Send in the Tesla guns! ^^
@MaitreKorda
5 жыл бұрын
Soldiers with Tesla guns tazzing knights: "No so smart with your heavy metal conducting armor now, are you?"
@PerfectAlibi1
5 жыл бұрын
@@MaitreKorda Yes, because when your enemy has tesla guns you totally continue wearing your metal armour... XD
@MaitreKorda
5 жыл бұрын
@@PerfectAlibi1 It's like a rock paper scissors, you may think you had a good idea to not wear armor to be immune to the tesla lances, but then your regiment come straight in the line of fire of a regiment of crossbowmen. You're fucked. In the end, it would be up to generals, and others officiers to move their troops and assets accordingly. Because a knight would be better fitted to resist a projectile weapon, but will be destroyed in the eventuality of Tesla-powered weapon. On the other hand, someone without armour would be destroyed by any conventional weapon. Light armour (leather) would be a good alternative, but not protect much from projectiles or others weapons.
@fatalshore5068
5 жыл бұрын
@@MaitreKorda So you equip your soldiers with both weapons.
@MaitreKorda
5 жыл бұрын
@@fatalshore5068 Too expensive and heavy, they would be slower. They would also still be at risk of getting caught by cavalery or another close combat unit that would slash them. Polyvalent soldiers who can carry and use all weapons + armours are expensive, take a lot of time to train, and are not desirable for large battle, but precise objectives.
@maxwellli7057
5 жыл бұрын
2:23 "Armies had to improve the quality of their swords" **swaps to golden sword*
@maxwellli7057
5 жыл бұрын
@@nuphhrffe875 n o . . .
@carlosmanuelmartinez8428
5 жыл бұрын
Thomas McNab no the diamonds are stronger
@VioletZauber
5 жыл бұрын
@@nuphhrffe875 iron is even better than gold swords. Gold swords suck
@cringeboi498
5 жыл бұрын
Gold swords are the same damage as wood just less durability
@VioletZauber
5 жыл бұрын
@@cringeboi498 yea they suck
@Kc40k
8 жыл бұрын
Praise the emperor for that Warhammer 40k referance.
@Kc40k
8 жыл бұрын
You deseve an iron halo for the second one, battle brother.
@Shunnedweevil9
8 жыл бұрын
+Kc40k and a purity seal for the third
@jaimekfouri6431
8 жыл бұрын
The emperor protects!
@emperorconstantine1.361
8 жыл бұрын
PURGE, KILL, MAIM THE HERETIC!!!
@riploljustforfu9929
8 жыл бұрын
indeed
@DrBeauHightower
4 жыл бұрын
CAVALRY not CALVARY (where Jesus was crucified)
@samedwards3285
4 жыл бұрын
*_YES_*
@TheeGrumpy
3 жыл бұрын
In an alternate timeline, mounted troops ride calves.
@dianer7705
3 жыл бұрын
YES. How can someone so intelligent mess up such a basic word? Has he never heard it pronounced anywhere else before? Doesn't give me much faith in him as a historian tbh
@brandoncrum4969
3 жыл бұрын
🤣
@brandoncrum4969
3 жыл бұрын
@@TheeGrumpy calfs not calves.
@Satan-nw4lv
5 жыл бұрын
Klaus! Panzer on the North! grab the bag of spears! Tank crew: **loads a giant bolt at the giant crossbow mount**
@inklun3172
4 жыл бұрын
Its called a ballista
@Satan-nw4lv
4 жыл бұрын
@@inklun3172 if you mount a balista on a tank hull, is it still called a balista?
@scooperdooper4097
4 жыл бұрын
@@Satan-nw4lv yes, satan
@lordpumpkinhead265
2 жыл бұрын
ENEMY TRAIN INCOMING, AND THE BALLISTA IS AIMED RIGHT AT US!
@cr0sad3r70
2 жыл бұрын
"Load AP bolts!"
@fastestskier4499
8 жыл бұрын
If gun powder was never created, then this video would never have been created :/
@Chief_Keith
8 жыл бұрын
What does gunpowder have to do with the invention of the internet?
@djcool39111
8 жыл бұрын
+Chief Keith the fact that the british empire would not have neccesarily become to powerful and took so much land, which in the future could mean that australia/usa might not exist and in theory that could mean the idea for a computer or internet was never thought of
@Chief_Keith
8 жыл бұрын
Dr Muffin Mhm I think we would still have them but not at the same time as we do in this timeline. It would just take longer to create but I think it would eventually happen. But we don't really have a clear cut answer as to if it would or would not.
@xcodydoe
8 жыл бұрын
I think what +fastest skier means is that there would be no need for this video since gunpowder never existed in that timeline.
@Reubentheimitator6572
8 жыл бұрын
+Shadow Knight - Road to 100k subs Oh yeah.
@gudmundursteinar
4 жыл бұрын
I think you missed the most important effect, the relationship between the rulers and the population. Gunpowder, the flintlock and the ring bayonet not only make battles more lethal (leading to more siege warfare); they also change what is required for victory in war. By the 14th century the nobility itself no longer decided battles, mercenaries did, so in that period the ability to finance and hire mercenaries was the deciding factor in war. With the flintlock and ring bayonet that changed. You could simply shanghai a group of peasants, give them relatively cheap weapons and drill them for 6 weeks and you had an army. That makes control over access to recruits the most important factor in creating an army (in addition to equipping them). That means if the peasants refuse to be conscripted you lose your war, that means the peasants need to be heard when going to war. This is the fundamental cause of modern democracy. Rulers traded political power for military power. Without gunpowder we would still be relying on mercenaries of the late medieval period because skill is decisive in melee combat while in ranged combat drill is decisive. You can drill peasants but only experience creates skill.
@warpartyattheoutpost4987
4 жыл бұрын
Great point! That's why the 2nd Amendment is so important to many Americans like myself. With my guns I'm not reliant upon a nobleman's knights in order to protect my family.
@godemperorofmankind3.091
4 жыл бұрын
@@warpartyattheoutpost4987 if it wasnt a gun itd be an auto crossbow or something. technological progress is inevitable
@warpartyattheoutpost4987
4 жыл бұрын
@@godemperorofmankind3.091, an auto crossbow or some sort of pneumatic system that fired projectiles. This video should've explored the technological alternatives to gunpowder more, that was the reason I clicked on it.
@thewildcardperson
2 жыл бұрын
@@warpartyattheoutpost4987 tesla gun
@DerDudelino
2 жыл бұрын
It's mostly a money play. Gunpowder units are expensive, canons for example used to be extremely expensive. It allowed richer countries to conquer and rule poor ones. Without Gunpowder the Spanish and English would've not been able to conquer half South America .
@ZeroRekoning
8 жыл бұрын
Can we have "IF Alexander the Great didn't die so young"
@ArvosCrusader
8 жыл бұрын
Yeah I would like a vid on that
@jusdism
8 жыл бұрын
Bonne idea
@supercool1312
8 жыл бұрын
Or IF the Vikings had guns and maybe bombs
@ZeroRekoning
8 жыл бұрын
sonicj Polygon Might as well say IF trump became president
@samwolfenstein5239
8 жыл бұрын
YES
@draxtheliteralist1107
7 жыл бұрын
We would have invented Light Sabers
@russiandoggoatyourservice7288
7 жыл бұрын
Drax the Literalist LMAO😂😂
@thegaminglettuce5124
7 жыл бұрын
then we would be star wars, then in another galaxy there was real earth too watching star wars movie
@davepressy720
7 жыл бұрын
TheGaming Lettuce multi-verse?
@ol-si4lx
7 жыл бұрын
Drax the Literalist xD
@BlueBerry-uh8lw
7 жыл бұрын
true
@errorinscript1127
5 жыл бұрын
We could have used lasers, Flamethrrowers, radioation or even Electricity! Or some other flammable substance.
@bahanadad9200
5 жыл бұрын
Split an attom so hard it laonches a black hole at them
@flare9757
5 жыл бұрын
Why does nobody factor in Railguns?
@melchid8448
5 жыл бұрын
@@flare9757 Because we will maybe need a extra millenium to make them in this timeline and because of that it would be meaningless to consider by today standarts
@flare9757
5 жыл бұрын
Justin C. On the contrary. There are several fully functional railguns today.
@melchid8448
5 жыл бұрын
@@flare9757 No i dont mean to say think i want to say is if we dont have gunpowder we would not have colonization of world by europe then because of that there is no industrial age then there is not technological advances that make us today okey maybe we would find some alternatives over time but if there was no gunpowder we need maybe 1 or 2 millenium to even come the place we are in now
@robertraymond762
3 жыл бұрын
I don't know why, but Ive always thought that it'd be cool for every village, town, and city to be surrounded by a wall. I imagine it'd add a real distinct feeling of security to each of those places, ya know? Also, I feel like it'd add a sense of adventure to every trip outside of the city walls.
@evianwyner8280
2 жыл бұрын
i introduce to you swimdon in the amazing frog also attack on titan
@evianwyner8280
2 жыл бұрын
@@droiddevx03 ... have you never seen or heard sarcasm or jokes do you honestly think im serious when i say Damn attack on Titan and the AMAZING FROG WHAT IN THAT SEEMS SERIOUS TO YOU
@evianwyner8280
2 жыл бұрын
@@droiddevx03 well that was uncharacteristic well thats a lie also :3
@tareqsawalmeh6393
Жыл бұрын
Those exist in rea life in the form of illegal Israeli settlements in the Palestinian West Bank
@anthonybramante2921
Жыл бұрын
Basically late game Civ V
@leagneu
5 жыл бұрын
"Europeans put guns on boats" G U N B O A T S
@namedrik5876
5 жыл бұрын
bill wurtz
@TheKusarigama
5 жыл бұрын
O P E N T H E C O U N T R Y
@blerinaxhani7060
5 жыл бұрын
S T O P H A V I N G I T B E C L O S E D
@brookesystem
5 жыл бұрын
By this time
@f4llen489
4 жыл бұрын
Knock Knock, it's the Americans. With boats. Huge boats. With guns. G U N B O A T S.
@snorp6781
5 жыл бұрын
2:22 "...Armies had to improve..." Iron to gold. "...Sharper and more durable..."
@hugedog4063
2 жыл бұрын
Thank god I wasn't the only one to notice that
@jaridkeen123
7 жыл бұрын
Maybe they would use gases under pressure
@Crownsnek
7 жыл бұрын
Jarid Gaming they do for airsoft weapons which are non-lethal
@lukasg4807
7 жыл бұрын
yes but you can mod those to become lethal
@warriormes6012
7 жыл бұрын
Jarid Gaming Well, in the end gunpowder weapons are just gas pressure weapons too. The question is just, how can you supply enough pressure to an infantry weapon, without a pressure source as strong as gunpowder?
@AishaDracoGryph
7 жыл бұрын
They would also use other explosives.
@arkadiuszjandylewski152
7 жыл бұрын
THERE WILL BE MORE SOPHISTICATED AIR GUNS!!
@mobilizedpanda3795
6 жыл бұрын
It would be more gradual but eventually we would adapt. Small caliber compressed air weapons. Air dropped cluster / shrapnel munitions. Naval rail guns. Even nuclear weapons. If you want to be more literal you can even still have explosives without gun powder. Plastic explosives could still exist.
@maciejkozak3448
6 жыл бұрын
Exactly.
@TEverettReynolds
6 жыл бұрын
Natural gas would have been discovered, and its explosive capabilities.
@TEverettReynolds
6 жыл бұрын
> Small caliber compressed air weapons Large caliber, with the discovery of coal and the invention of the steam engine...
@anteglamuzina663
5 жыл бұрын
Or someone could invent an automatic crossbow. With time it would get more compact and eventually fire solid projectiles instead of arrows. And there goes your gun...
@IamDogge
3 жыл бұрын
ONI? Why are you here?
@rancorpoodoo7445
8 жыл бұрын
what if Caesar was never backstabbed by the senate?
@nickhanson8118
8 жыл бұрын
Things I see: What you did there.
@donleonsroszavilla5734
8 жыл бұрын
Caesar provoke his own death by goading the ' mob/ civilian population ' into proclaiming him King. Caesar was an old man at them time of his death, late 50's. He had epalipse/ the shakes, and was whereing Depends. The family records at the time show that he was slowly dying. If Caesar killed his polical riviles the city civilians would turn on him and his family for trying to take control of the Empire. If his P.R. killed him/ the Great Hero of the Empire. The city would revenge kill his rivils and his family would gain all of the power.
@terriblycharismaticduck2717
8 жыл бұрын
I AM... The Senate!
@GODOFNIGTMARES
8 жыл бұрын
Maybe the empire would expanded faster. Maybe they could have conquered Persia
@CristianBLeon
8 жыл бұрын
+Terribly Charismatic Duck you, I like you! Hahaha
@CStone-xn4oy
3 жыл бұрын
I would love to see some sort of fictional setting where walled cities and chivalrous combat with hand to hand weapons was still a thing in a 21st century. It could make an interesting setting for stories and games.
@MothNow
2 жыл бұрын
@CAT CHANNEL There is still America (the continents), just not our modern american countries
@ViralVenom
2 жыл бұрын
@CAT CHANNEL actually we're still hanging in there. And are taking back our republic. This election is a proverbial blood bath.
@amooingdog3297
2 жыл бұрын
Metal Gear Rising
@thelonelyghostN
Жыл бұрын
same
@Epicgirl368
Жыл бұрын
@@amooingdog3297RULES OF NATURE
@justzach253
7 жыл бұрын
Could you imagine carrying your sword handling permit? When your packing usually meant you had stainless steel
@melissabautz2346
7 жыл бұрын
ZippyZach , people would protest for anti-sword movements, and others would advocate for the right to owning a sword. Daggers would seem as dangerous as pistols, and we'd us spoons to cut butter.
@ThallanarRabidtooth
7 жыл бұрын
Unless that sword was for show or to hang on a wall, swords were never made of stainless steel. Stainless steel is WAY too brittle to be used for a sword. Shortswords, MAYBE... Daggers, yeah, you can have stainless steel daggers. The problem with stainless steel SWORDS is that the blade is so strong that it will shatter when impacted hard enough. It's just too hard. The harder the steel, the more brittle it is. The softer the steel, the more durable it is. A stainless steel sword may cut deeper than a high carbon steel sword but the stainless steel sword will break in two pieces once someone tried to parry another sword. The high carbon steel sword will have a shallower cut, but when parried with another sword, it will bend and flex and return to straight because it's not as hard as stainless steel. The edge on a stainless steel blade will last longer, but if parried edge-to-edge, the edge will chip off. The hardened edge also allows for the stainless steel blade to be sharper, because it can be angled at a shorter angle, since it's so hard. The edge of a high carbon steel blade will be wider, because it's not as hard, and if a high carbon steel blade's edge was as shallow as a stainless steel blade's edge, then it will dull very fast. The edge will roll to the side or be impacted in because it's softer than stainless steel. This is why I say stainless steel blades are usually sharper than high carbon steel, but a broken sword is worse than a dull sword, so high carbon steel blades were always used in combat. Stainless steel sword blades were either ceremonial, or decorative. They required less maintenance as well, since stainless steel is much more corrosion resistant than high carbon.
@bigdojacoom8999
7 жыл бұрын
Thallanar Rabidtooth It's a fucking joke .-.
@jasonlee148
7 жыл бұрын
Yes I would. The Japanese literally aren't allowed to own a samurai sword without a permit. That's why there has been no incident of mass murders by a lunitic with a sword ever!
@margchet23
7 жыл бұрын
Thallanar Rabidtooth you know what humor is right? -_-
@scoutgaming3272
4 жыл бұрын
air rifles existed since the napoleonic wars. They fired almost completely noiselessly, used no gunpowder, and didnt make big smoke clouds, yet were more accurate than muskets. There were only two reasons why they didn't become more prominent: Cost, and complexity. However, these wouldn't have mattered when they could absolutely destroy fully ironclad knights.
@Ttegegg
Жыл бұрын
But you need the building block for such an invention. Like natives liked using guns. They just didn’t know how to produce such weapon on a massive scale
@lethalexponent6
Жыл бұрын
You cant make an air rifle if you don't know what a rifle is
@davidkong8493
Жыл бұрын
air rifles are designed off of the idea of something expanding with enough energy to push something small through a tube at high velocities. Without gun powder it would take lot longer for this concept to be realized
@mistrsportak9940
10 ай бұрын
But people would still invent steam engines, easily learning about pressure and expansion, wouldn't they?@@davidkong8493
@NA-ck6cz
6 жыл бұрын
Massive railguns
@PeliSotilas
6 жыл бұрын
Nick Angelos Tanks with ballistas and gatling guns.
@user-pc5sc7zi9j
6 жыл бұрын
gatling guns also use gunpowder.
@PeliSotilas
6 жыл бұрын
a I meant like an arrow shooting gatling gun.
@Jack_Has1000
6 жыл бұрын
And Tesla's Death Ray :)
@Ch4pp13
6 жыл бұрын
I think the railgun idea sprung up from advancement in gun science. So nope.
@slipperysalamander7717
5 жыл бұрын
I can just imagine someone breaking into a house and the owner since guns dont exist grabbing a short bow from his closet
@jak.cr1ym
3 жыл бұрын
lmfao
@user-sw7ln9ro7y
5 жыл бұрын
Did you see modern crossbows? Imagine balistas with those materials. Then put em on a ship. Opium wars would've been much more epic
@CteCrassus
4 жыл бұрын
And now put a bundle of dynamite around the bolt tip.
@jockeyfield1954
2 жыл бұрын
@@CteCrassus the reason dynamite was invented was because of the fact that explosives at the time were dangerous to anyone who used them. without gunpowder, the need for a safe explosive would be nonexistent, therefore, no dynamite
@CteCrassus
2 жыл бұрын
@@jockeyfield1954 Dynamite was invented because *nitroglycerine* was far too dangerous, not gunpowder. Gunpowder doesn't need to exist for the mining industry to need a safe way to blow stuff up.
@T11235
2 жыл бұрын
@@CteCrassus people just assume the absence of gunpowder means no explosives exist at all or that firearms are never invented
@lordpumpkinhead265
2 жыл бұрын
@@CteCrassus Wouldn't dynamite be obsolete since Gunpowder is removed?
@darkfireslide
6 жыл бұрын
This is unlikely to be seen, but without gunpowder, cavalry would have remained very relevant. The need for tactical mobility in any operation is always a necessity, and the lack of it led to the destruction and loss of life during the first World War. Horses can be armored just as men can, and in a sense, the tactical usage of the cavalryman and the modern tank are functionally the same: heavier units can break through frontlines, and lighter ones can attack flanks and routed enemies. Without gunpowder, men on horses with lances and sabres are still an extremely important part of any army.
@chaotic_enby2625
6 жыл бұрын
darkfireslide what if you would replace the horses with vehicles similar to motorbikes
@darkfireslide
6 жыл бұрын
World War 1 still had firearms. After the adoption of proper cavalry tactics, you cannot find a war pre-firearms where cavalry did not significantly change the way the war was fought. Even though Agincourt was a devastating loss for the French forces, the presence of heavily armored cavalry significantly changed the way the English fought and thought about their situation. Without guns, armor is still relevant and thus so is the heavy cavalryman. Even after gunpowder, all throughout the age of the musket, cavalry is still a useful and present battlefield tool, although much less invincible. In WW1, the cavalryman is replaced by the tank crew by war's end.
@criter96
6 жыл бұрын
Horses aren't useful only on the battlefield. That's actually where the myth about Polish cavalry charging on tanks was born. Poland at the beggining of WW1 used cavalry, but not in the battlefield, but as means to reposition. It was basically hit squat of well trained foot soldiers with out of combat mobility of cavalry
@ordoordo8917
6 жыл бұрын
I'm seeing motorized cavalry, like soldiers on bikes running at full speed with their swords
@Nickman826
5 жыл бұрын
Also imagine breeding horses for ever increased strength (to better wear armor)
@estevanflores3432
8 жыл бұрын
If gun powder never existed, Harambe would've never died
@legionxiii8055
8 жыл бұрын
He would've been stabbed instead.
@legionxiii8055
8 жыл бұрын
He would've been stabbed instead.
@jonasciliento336
8 жыл бұрын
Or shot with an arrow
@Harsh-up3ip
8 жыл бұрын
Technically speaking, Harambe may have never even been born. Who knows if the parents of Harambe would even procreate with the amount of things gunpowder has helped do which could influence that very action. Britain may not have been as powerful which eventually leads to the USA which would also eventually lead to the Cincinnati Zoo never being made, including the animals inside.
@sebastiand1941
8 жыл бұрын
Now that's a world I would like to live in
@Kototag
3 жыл бұрын
One of the biggest effects could have been japan. The person who single handedly reunified Japan, only survived early on through the use of muskets and there role in major battles were the deciding factor. Who knows what Japan would have looked like.
@Stallion386
7 жыл бұрын
Small, fast tanks used for running over formations of infantry perhaps? Landships? Aircraft used for scouting and travel only. Man, this would be cool to see.
@magscorch7706
7 жыл бұрын
Stallion386 Even though it would be awesome, tanks would never exist. Neither would ironclads, neither would bayonets, neither would trenches, neither would periscopes. The first tanks were basically moving shields with rifles and machine guns in them to stop the bullets that came their way. The only problem, is that they broke down nearly all the time. Planes would probably still be a thing. Or maybe not, since the Wright Brothers were American and America would be very different without gunpowder of any kind if there even would be an America.
@Ryanowning
7 жыл бұрын
Trenches existed before guns as a method of slowing and trapping cavalry charges. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trench_warfare#Field_works
@MW-qt9ts
7 жыл бұрын
Aircraft can always drop stuff. Kinetic bombardment is a thing.
@ForgeMoon
7 жыл бұрын
maybe some kind of armoured carriage with a ballista on top?
@Jansmaaa
7 жыл бұрын
Airplanes dropping big piles of stone on infantry lines... Wow.. :D
@ravenlord4
7 жыл бұрын
You totally missed the effect of other siege weapons against fortifications, ships, and even open fields. The arms race would have centered around the catapult, trebuchet, mangonel, and ballista; and the types of ammunition that they used. The weapons would have impelled massive development of strong and lightweight metal alloys, and ammunition would have spurred a chemist's race for flammables, poisons, and corrosives. Basically the world would have been alchemist-punk and clockwork-punk until the advent of steam-punk. The industrial revolution probably hits much earlier in Europe to support the new "high-tech" environment. Africa and the New World still get mowed down by European colonization regardless. And major intervention into Asia didn't really occur until the invention of ironclad ships, so in the new timeline this still occurs except these steam powered ships are armed with steam cannon and catapults with chlorine canisters and napalm instead of gunpowder shells. Also, even without gunpowder, you still have other solid explosives that would have been invented like TNT and plastics explosives like C4. I think the only main difference is that the "common soldier" gets phased out in favor of engineers and technicians who escort and care for mobile siege weapons, and grenadiers who act as mini weapons platforms. War would be slower, cities would still have walls (until military flight and rockets). And the US war of independence, if it does occur, most likely fails horribly due to the lack of viable weapons for the rebel colonists. In this scenario, Britain and France either carve up the world or stay at each others throat until some new upstart topples them.
@Firabe
6 жыл бұрын
My thoughts exactly. He didn't really mention siege weapons here. And chemicals can also explode or poison.
@revy7870
6 жыл бұрын
I would love to see a movie like this
@TomdeArgentina
6 жыл бұрын
The first industrial revolution, that prepared the social organizatin for the second one, was based on textile industry stolen from India. Industrial revolution would probably happen there, unless imitated by China or taken by them or by other power.
@mystikmind2005
6 жыл бұрын
Yep, steam cannons. Obviously much slower rate of fire but beggars can't be choosers. And with the industrial revolution and the extensive understanding of pulley systems, i think compound bows would be invented much earlier and become the front line infantry weapons, and actually more effective than allot of muskets! By the time you get to the invention of the internal combustion engine, modern weaponry based on combustible materials is inevitable regardless of not having gun powder..... for this scenario to work, you would basically have to eliminate all highly combustible materials, not just gun powder. And the world would be stuck in the steam age, compound bows, steam cannons, catapults, and steam technology would be pushed, how far it can get who knows? Probably eventually steam driven tanks!
@renzoberzabatneyradelacruz9733
6 жыл бұрын
Write a book
@publican90
8 жыл бұрын
What if the Sahara was not a desert? How different would the world be if trade between the Mediterranean -Mideast area and south central and west Africa was easier?
@abarai2007
8 жыл бұрын
this is a good one!
@thanossakogiannis9123
8 жыл бұрын
interesting
@Zerpderp0
8 жыл бұрын
I third this
@umidontno040394
8 жыл бұрын
Africa would probably have been much more advanced.
@ohlookitsme9913
8 жыл бұрын
yasssśsssss
@frankenstein6677
4 жыл бұрын
10:47 Honestly, the strongest advantage that the conquistadores had against Aztecs and other Empires was their native allies from the Atlantic coast, as well as diseases and agricultural damage caused by feral pigs and the like, but I agree that many societies would be able to hold their own even then, without gunpowder.
@spaghettimkay5795
8 жыл бұрын
"Calvary" oh god please no.
@fg3893
8 жыл бұрын
it triggers me every time lol
@Yuki_Francisco
8 жыл бұрын
RIGHT?!?!?!
@anikii5814
8 жыл бұрын
I didn't trained for years just to get killed like this!!!
@Jetxx
8 жыл бұрын
I fully support the "wrong" way.
@ByakurenEnjoyer
8 жыл бұрын
CHEERS LOVE CAVALRY'S HERE
@nitrous-heart7584
6 жыл бұрын
To be honest compressed air would eventually become more prominent. Idk how but it offers an interesting solution
@whoiam5838
2 жыл бұрын
It definitely would. For a while compressed air rifles for a while were more effective than gunpowder rifles (much faster reloading and quieter, though not as powerful) but were not used as much due to their cost and complexity.
@ValphaVolf
2 жыл бұрын
@@whoiam5838 and for what I saw in a comment somewhere in the comment section (Ik its not very trustable but I if its wrong or right I learn either way) it has less range (can't tell if its compared to modern or old/muskets guns) and it gets reduced after each shot
@whoiam5838
2 жыл бұрын
@@ValphaVolf I believe that it had less range than even the old guns/muskets, and it did get a little less powerful after each shot, but the Girardoni Air Rifle we think Lewis and Clark took on their expedition had a magazine that held 22 bullets, and was reloaded by tipping the gun up and pressing a button on the side. That is is an incredible rate of fire during that time. I also believe I heard that you could get off about to magazine's worth of shots before it lost enough air that it stopped being effective, at which point you would have had to take off the butt stock air canister and either pump it back up, or replace it with a fresh one.
@ZiPolishHammer
8 жыл бұрын
Advanced projectiles would likely be created without gunpowder. Compressed gas, hydraulic pressure, electro magnets... just a few ideas
@DarkfeltFoE
8 жыл бұрын
Exactly. As metallurgy evolved there would likely be a form of 'steam gun' similar to a external combustion steam boat engine. Eventually, magnetic railgun technology would evolve with much the same effect as gunpowder. However, due to the advanced metal requirements it would likely have been a couple hundred years later down the road. How much would the development of metal technology have been delayed if nations were not looking for better and better metal to make gunpowder weapons?
@MikeKojoteStone
8 жыл бұрын
Agreed. Eventually, somebody would've come up with something that allows for guns based on different principles. EVentually, this would lead to guns not dissimilar to what we know today. But the face of the world would be different. The age of exploration would probably still have happened, but not turned into a time of conquest. Africa, America and especially technologically already very advannced Asia wouldn't have been taken by Europe easily. There would probably still have been colonies, but they would have depended on cooperation with the respective natives. By the time some alternative for guns got invented, the less advanced people around the world would have been brought up to speed by cultural exchange and spheres of influence would have been firmly established. The invention would have spread among technologically comparable enemies quickly and there wouldn't have been as many of the one-sided conquests we know from actual history. That means that it's very likely we'd have strong, predominantly native countries in the Americas, probably with significant amounts of European and Asien blood mixed in, but culturally unique and not very European. Europe wouldn't have prospered from the influx of cheap resources from the colonies and wouldn't be as dominant in a global sense. It could also still be much more divided, as unification came along with the power of guns and the prospect of new continents to plunder. What an interesting world that would be. Completely alien to modern day eyes. China would probably be the number one global player, perhaps followed by India and maybe even some culturally more Mongol Russia long before any European nation. No USA as we know it. Probably nothing united in N.A. at all. Perhaps some descendants of the Inca or the Aztecs as another global player? Or maybe Europe would have had to really band together and become a superstate to not be overrun? Or maybe there wouldn't be ANY real superpowers? I'd say we'd likely have some kind of gladitorial sports as the main entertainment event, as personal combat skills stayed relevant for so much longer. The world could be much more warlike or even much more peaceful as WMDs were likely to be developed much later when technology already made for some globalization and a different balance of power would have been in place already. Hasn't anybody written a good book about this? The setting allows for infinite possibilities. Heck, an author couold go nuts, as nobody could predict what would really have happened with certainty...
@MikeKojoteStone
8 жыл бұрын
Cocoflash J Just not in the 16th and 17th century when the gunpowder thing really made the biggest technological difference.
@ZiPolishHammer
8 жыл бұрын
Cocoflash J Early biological warfare, now that could be disastrous for mankind.
@giovannib666
8 жыл бұрын
Or... Magic
@thePauchu
4 жыл бұрын
Might be possible, that things like Gauss rifles would have been invented already. The idea of launching projectiles at enemies already existed, electricity would still have been discovered, why not?
@thePauchu
2 жыл бұрын
@CAT CHANNEL I think you missed the whole point of the video
@Bear-kb4kt
8 жыл бұрын
no gun powder = harambe still alive
@sanguiniusthegreatangel6880
8 жыл бұрын
they would shoot him with a cross bow or something bigger like a ballista
@thingforcommenting98
8 жыл бұрын
+smilermiles ftw bit ott
@thingforcommenting98
8 жыл бұрын
+smilermiles ftw a ballista bolt would kill the kid aswell (good riddance)
@angelartiyalvt9574
8 жыл бұрын
They probably would've just used a tranquilizer gun that used compressed air instead.
@kevinazzinoth4547
8 жыл бұрын
Bows, crossbows. And also someone already said that
@thewidow7864
6 жыл бұрын
No guns, no USA
@noticias6111
5 жыл бұрын
A world without Donald Glover's 'This is America'--kzitem.info/news/bejne/um-GxWGbfGlnn6A
@bentononline
5 жыл бұрын
dont tease me like this
@The_InfantMalePollockFrancis
5 жыл бұрын
No Ottoman Empire, no end to feudalism, no Spanish, French and English empires, and just about four centuries of Western AND eastern history wouldn't have happened before the Advent of the USA. Really anachronistic reasoning you have there.
@astralope
5 жыл бұрын
Technically the original goal was to go to india but they found amercia they saw the natives(because they thought they were indians) they enslaved the natives and yadayada freedom & purging the original land owners The origin of america is dark
@BeyondDaX
5 жыл бұрын
Which means no memes.
@ipppppi1205
2 жыл бұрын
Weirdly i imagine a tank rolling down like cavalry but there is no cannon gunpowder so it just ram people over.
@JimGiant
6 жыл бұрын
We still would have had catapults, trebuchets etc. They wouldn't have had as much room for improvement since they use mechanical rather than chemical power but still a lot of room for improvement. They could be scaled up, made more mobile, use stronger materials or could be loaded via a steam engine rather than man power etc. I could see compressed air or petrol being used to power rifles too.
@BerttheHuman4TheHydrant
8 жыл бұрын
but...but.... war never changes
@juliendacoolien3454
8 жыл бұрын
It's high noon.
@victor7gomez
8 жыл бұрын
but but War has changed
@jaredtheurer6309
8 жыл бұрын
JUSTICE RAINS FROM AHHHHHH
@lahzey1257
8 жыл бұрын
Heroes never die, for a price.
@notnebeyuiswear2588
8 жыл бұрын
It doesn't people still murder and massacre each other
@Superhrnet
8 жыл бұрын
Even removing all forms of solid fuel explosive from combat, I think it's still safe to assume other forms of projectile weapons become more abundant. Granted, they will probably be used more like small artillery pieces. I can see the creation of mechanical ballistas that shoot bolts like a pitching machine throws baseballs. I can see armored cars with primarily flamethrowers as weapons. I can see that petroleum bombs and liquid fueled rockets might see wide use to burn a battlefield to utter devastation. Naval warfare would be completely focused on setting fires on enemy ships until ironclads come around. I can also imagine some absolutely sick mechanical melee weapons, like arm mounted pile drivers used to pierce an enemy's thick armor.
@slmnemo
8 жыл бұрын
electromagnetic guns may come about too
@ValStartaker
8 жыл бұрын
Guns operated by electromagnets would be common. A bullet is placed in with the back being negative, and when you pull the trigger it completes a circuit, turning on the magnet's negative side, repelling the bullet at a high speed out of the barrel
@Balsiefen
8 жыл бұрын
Gotta love Gauss cannons.
@The_Custos
8 жыл бұрын
Knights pouring out of apcs.
@kevinsullivan3448
8 жыл бұрын
Steam canon would have been successful. Also he said gunpower, not nitroglycerine, which eventually became dynamite, gelignite, and cordite.
@fanusobscurus
3 жыл бұрын
Every time I look back at this, I keep envisioning a world of pneumatic weaponry once the industrial revolution hits. We tend to think of them as toys or sporting goods, like BB Rifles, and airsoft guns. But there were actual air powered rifles that were made for killing. The Austrian military used an Italian design from 1780 to 1815. Theoretically, you could create pneumatic cannons firing metal spikes at high velocities, enough to puncture armor. Picture something like the press guns from Break Blade, only not powered by magic crystals.
@user-ff4xw1ts2w
8 жыл бұрын
What if the US annexed all of Mexico in the Mexican/American war? (The US actually took over Mexico City during the war, but didn't incorporate Modern Mexico into the US)
@drag0n_rage682
8 жыл бұрын
there'd still be immagrants but they'd be the ones that mexico doesnt like, central americans
@RushPowa
8 жыл бұрын
+Worminator Incorrect. Trump would be talking about illegal immigrants from Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Belize, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Panama instead of illegal Mexicans.
@darken2417
8 жыл бұрын
Some Americans did believe that the war "was fated to unite the two nations under republicanism" (republicanism in the sense of joining the American Republic). So its not a all too unlikely scenario. But there were a few things preventing that outcome, 1. US was rather hostile to other cultures and incorporating that many people would be tough on both the Americans and the Mexicans. 2. Expanding and building on so much land would be extremely costly. 3. Adding more territory would further escalate the issue of slavery in the US as all of parts of Mexico except Texas would be a free state(Mexico was antislavery) unless they were designated as slave states by Congress. 4. The people disliked the idea of empire building and conquering foreign lands because of "liberty", "freedom", etc. Perhaps the Confederates never declare independence because they would be completely outmatched. Perhaps they do and Mexico tries to declare independence and is put back down after the Civil War ends. Perhaps Mexico and the Confederates fight the Union (unlikely because issues of Texas and since Mexico was antislavery). Perhaps Mexico fights for the Union in return for higher autonomy and lands in Texas and California.
@juan5050juan
8 жыл бұрын
Trump would ejaculate
@Universer2012
8 жыл бұрын
America would send their special forces to devastate the drug cartels. They wouldn't stand a chance against the FBI and ATF. A nicer America and world because less people dependant on drugs, and less crime caused from drugs and the firearms Mexican drug cartels can gather due to Mexico's weak government.
@Thecarsonlane
8 жыл бұрын
Then Harambe would be alive.
@xIvan15
8 жыл бұрын
Yup if only 😭
@thahdeepseadivuh7501
8 жыл бұрын
Lol i was going to say that
@osedebame3522
8 жыл бұрын
He would be shot by a crossbow.
@osedebame3522
8 жыл бұрын
I used to be an internet meme like you, then I took an arrow to the knee ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
@osedebame3522
8 жыл бұрын
Brutal
@aidiero
5 жыл бұрын
im fighting north korea on a Apache helicopter with my crossbow!!
@MaitreKorda
5 жыл бұрын
Crossbows would've been automated eventually. Imagine a rocket launcher, but it shoots bolts.
@cringeboi498
5 жыл бұрын
Your helicopter would have 0 weapons so gotta hire the boys so you can drive and shoot
@OldTownCrab
5 жыл бұрын
Air rifles are more efficient and reliable then bows and crossbows, but they arent good enough to match guns so they'd just be the new crossbows
@mikepratt7437
5 жыл бұрын
Helicopters would still have "missile" launchers on them. Missile=capable of being thrown or projected to strike a distant target.
@jorisveltmaat
5 жыл бұрын
@@mikepratt7437 but the explosion isnt there, so its just like a catapult. Throwing an heavy thing at a crowd or building
@jdzencelowcz
4 жыл бұрын
"Into the Badlands" came close, but that was a post-apocalypse, post-gun world. JoergSprave developed a repeating crossbow & improved on a repeating longbow on his YT page, also there's the rapid fire catapult from the 2nd Chronicles of Narnia movie; I think we'd see all 3 in a gunless world. Not to mention ballise on prop planes & helicopters.
@imienazwisko6527
8 жыл бұрын
No gunpowder, no guns, no european world domination, no world wars, no nuclear energy and bombs, no cold war, no internet, no youtube, no AlternateHistoryHub.
@ferbthe2gadgetguy
8 жыл бұрын
Król Cieni Alternate Histories are very scary
@imienazwisko6527
7 жыл бұрын
***** If there was no gunpowder, guns will never exist. If there were no guns, there will be no world wars. If no world wars, no nuclear energy and bombs. It's sequence of events.
@imienazwisko6527
7 жыл бұрын
***** Without nukes WW II may never end.
@sausagejockyGaming
7 жыл бұрын
Król Cieni no any technology or industrial revolution without uk
@imienazwisko6527
7 жыл бұрын
When thinking about alternative history, it's easier to say "what will *not* happen?"
@KVirello
8 жыл бұрын
Gunpowder is lit
@davidfonseca9095
8 жыл бұрын
*Slow Clap*
@clumsycapy
8 жыл бұрын
sarcastic clap
@markknife1
8 жыл бұрын
slow burn
@fossilizedanimals5503
8 жыл бұрын
God damn it barbara
@OlaftheFlashy
8 жыл бұрын
Sure took off with a bang.
@dylanschnabel4859
4 жыл бұрын
5:46 "Oi, Jimmy, why you dun bring a baby to a battlefield!?" "'Aven't you heard? It's bring your child to work day. 'Sides, we couldn't afford a sitter" "Oi, Jimmy, your son's been strung up on a bayonet like a wee squib on a stick!" "Aw shucks, I'ma get a load outa the old woman t'nite"
@andrebarreto9177
6 жыл бұрын
Just because we wouldnt have gunpownder it does not mean we wouldnt have combustion engines or eletricity, the idea of a steam cannon or machines is older then gunpownder, going back to anciente greece
@docpossum2460
5 жыл бұрын
Woolly Rhinos were killed off by the native American's with bows and arrows.
@theinternetgoose6247
5 жыл бұрын
We don't use gunpowder anyway.
@yeetman4953
4 жыл бұрын
@@docpossum2460 what?
@yeetman4953
4 жыл бұрын
@@docpossum2460 ok
@GigaChad-xg7er
4 жыл бұрын
Tesla guns and sorts of steampunk thing would happen hopefully
@aarontena
8 жыл бұрын
If gunpowder never existed USA would be boring
@jackmcfadden-finlayson372
8 жыл бұрын
Common sense broad sword regulations and the prohibition of claymores for private use.
@ravenyzf8293
8 жыл бұрын
Jack McFadden-Finlayson I bet that claymores would be legal in Scotland xD
@david6avila
8 жыл бұрын
What would american people do while they shouted: " 'MERICA FUCK YEAAAA!"
@ravenyzf8293
8 жыл бұрын
The american stereotypes are so good lmao
@MWH12085
8 жыл бұрын
or possibly never existed considering how hard it would be to establish a colony.
@sean668
8 жыл бұрын
Everyone's all saying "steam" or "pneumatic", but what about Greek Fire? If the Byzantines could hold out against the Seljuks, maybe it would spread further (despite being a secret). Replace guns with flamethrowers as the main infantry weapon. What would tactics look like?
@NM-br1rb
8 жыл бұрын
Terrifying. Absolutely terrifying, is what tactics and warfare would be like.
@GorlRoxy
8 жыл бұрын
+Nexi Corn Terrifying, but beuatiful. So much melting metal and screaming people. :3
@TrueLimeyhoney
8 жыл бұрын
If only the secret of Greek fire got out... we don't know if it even existed for sure.
@autolykos9822
8 жыл бұрын
Also, don't forget electricity. Railguns/Coilguns may still be inferior to conventional artillery, but if you don't have that, they may be a viable option. Not so much for small arms, though. Batteries and generators are still waaay too heavy. Most important change would probably be that airplanes are pretty much unarmed. Crossbows won't do you much good in a dogfight, after all... But that means bombers (and zeppelins) could drop firebombs with impunity, so the massive destruction of the two world wars still remains a possibility.
@gooscarguitar
8 жыл бұрын
+Emily Hawthorn (Emmy) When u play too much Medieval II
@Sgt_Long_Dong
2 жыл бұрын
I wonder if an alternative would’ve been made, like a water-sodium type thing. I’m not a science guy but I know the elements related to sodium tend to react violently with water
@destroyer1667
Жыл бұрын
There are many different explosive compounds, original blackpowder has been obsolete for a very long time so realistically barely anything would change in the long run
@Jedi_Master_Fonz
7 жыл бұрын
I once saw a rapid-fire crossbow that fired about 12 arrows in less than a minute. I bet having them as hand-held and/or stationary weapon would impact modern warfare in the alternate timeline.
@jellyjohnson7393
7 жыл бұрын
Luckily crossbows have significantly less penetration than rifle rounds.
@lata_merrocoffeeandchill6728
6 жыл бұрын
But a long bow at 100 lb pull can put a good arrow through iron armor I've seen to done of course it was a dummy but still freekin iron armor
@back2basegym729
6 жыл бұрын
Yes iron armor not steel
@Fish4Man61
6 жыл бұрын
Depends on what you are penetrating with Jelly? If you have tech to build rapid fire iron bolts, you will penetrate a shitload more than most modern bullets, even some AP rounds. Also, modern crossbows can go right through a great deal of classes of body armor, so actually, if you want to go against someone in body body armor, it might be helpful to have a POWERFUL crossbow (not one of the not as powerful delivering models). In alternative history land here; we would be faaar more advanced at this now, and yeah, for fortified long distance defenses, these could be quite deadly.
@DottaNatural
6 жыл бұрын
Or maybe a good shield and maxed out shield skill would come in handy.
@attcat
8 жыл бұрын
Harambe would be alive if not for gunpowder
@Darunia_s
8 жыл бұрын
Still would've been shanked.
@mule1298
8 жыл бұрын
+Demented Films harambe would fuck them up tho
@pyromancer4227
8 жыл бұрын
+Demented Films heheh
@jordan3012000
8 жыл бұрын
lol
@mr.dystopian5554
8 жыл бұрын
But then we wouldn't get these awesome dank memes.
@lordilluminati5836
8 жыл бұрын
I think electric-powered reapeating crossbows would be the standart 21st century weapon. or 22nd depending on how fast technology advances. hidraulics would play a larger role, we would see 'cannons' powered by water vapour preassure. flamethrowers become a more important part of warfare and napalm is never banned by the genebra conventions as it becomes too widespread.steam cannons would become the common siege weapon/artilliery and eventually walls would be phased out as well. oil is a great source of energy and would become more precious earlier on in human hystory as it would be a commodity used in the more frequent wars to power the machinery. metal prices would go up with the increased demand cause by the industrial revolution and armor would become rarer just like in our time.due to no gunpowder humanity is left without mining explosives and large-scale quarries, wich would slow down technological progress. tanks and airplanes are invented but aviation play a bit diferently: there are no dogfights and the only weapon that can be mounted on a plane is napalm or chemical weapons (and no gunpowder means no bombs untill someone invents nuclear explosives)when and if someone makes the first atomic bomb it will be a device so mindboglingly powerfull nothing before could ever compare, the honorary war ideal is suddently broken if it wasn't already by mustard gas and napalm and the risk of a nuclear apocalipse is much higher
@gendoruwo6322
8 жыл бұрын
lasers, you forgot lasers.
@lordilluminati5836
8 жыл бұрын
Gendo ruwo lasers require too much power to do anything significant. the only military aplication we currently have for lasers is disableing misiles. without gunpowder I doubt rocketry would go anywhere. lazers would still find industrial and cientific aplication though.
@davidhobbs5679
8 жыл бұрын
Nukes require conventional explosives
@lordilluminati5836
8 жыл бұрын
w8w0t sayitagain not all nukes. as I said there are ways to create preassure or accelerate a mass without the use of gunpowder. gunpowder just so happens to be the best way to do it, but others are theoretically possible too. nice profile pic+comment combo though.
@Kr4zYm0f0
8 жыл бұрын
Yet all of these idea's come from gunpowered inventions.
@sandrexgainsan1813
5 жыл бұрын
3:38 *the figures can't crouch* 🤣🤣🤣
@DavidBelch
5 жыл бұрын
Ca-val-ry. Cavalry.....I keep thinking you're talking about crucifying Jesus. Which is offputting in a video about warfare.
@brianbethea3069
5 жыл бұрын
It's even spelled Calvary in the closed captioning. My pedantic heart can't take it much longer.
@TheBudderWizard
4 жыл бұрын
Bro I know
@takebacktheholyland9306
5 жыл бұрын
Napoleon:* Gulp * Ottoman genesaries: * Gulp *
@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081
4 жыл бұрын
Jaissaries were originally archers, so they could still use that.
@thenewcaliph766
3 жыл бұрын
@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081 Janissaries were regular foot soldiers with swords. You are confusing Turkoman cavalry with Ottoman Janissaries.
@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081
3 жыл бұрын
@@thenewcaliph766 I'm not confusing anything with anybody, just because the Turkoman cavalry was proficient in horse archery it doesn't mean they were the only ones who did archery.
@thenewcaliph766
3 жыл бұрын
@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081 Im sorry if I didnt understand you. I was only saying that by the Ottoman period, horse archery and even archery as a whole was pretty obsolete. Armies were always composed of a large, beefy section of infantry both Janissary and Regular, cavalry and lots of siege equipment e.g. cannons, catapults etc.
@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081
3 жыл бұрын
@@thenewcaliph766 I have to disagree, in the early days of the Ottomans (before firearms were introduced) they had huge sections of cavalry when compared to the infantry. Additionally, look at the Timurids, the Ak Koyunlu, the Safavids and the Mameluks, these armies used huge numbers of cavalry, some of them specificaly archer cavalry.
@jackalhead7433
7 жыл бұрын
What if the secret of gunpowder never got out of China?
@monkkarts1231
7 жыл бұрын
Jackal head what if tang dinasty never allowed barbarian become their millitary general as far entering the court
@jackalhead7433
7 жыл бұрын
zulfikar abdul what do you mean when you say "a barabarian to become a general"? Do you mean Zhu Wen the man who ended the Tang Dynasty??
@boyo971
7 жыл бұрын
I think that it getting out of China was always inevitable, if they created it. Word would get around that China has some new, strange but very effective weapon that is improving, and suddenly the world would turn their attention to it.
@amoghbanerjee4697
6 жыл бұрын
Roose the Goose making gunpowder is not that simple, it may be possible that Chinese would have researched more into it and use it to invade the whole world even before timurs and Mongols.
@kennandunn7533
6 жыл бұрын
Then China would have become the dominant force on the planet instead of Europe.
@LithiumThiefMusic
6 жыл бұрын
well in the industrial revolution or possibly even sooner, people would've discovered nitroglycerin and other explosives too, let's not forget.
@flare9757
5 жыл бұрын
GravitySloth Railguns.
@datmedic2857
5 жыл бұрын
@@flare9757 laser guns
@flare9757
5 жыл бұрын
Lagfirst games We don’t know how to make laser guns yet... we have laser based defensive systems, but not anything handheld yet. However, we do have fully automatic Railgun rifles. The prototypes have been made in some guys garage, and has a lot of potential.
@Ushio01
5 жыл бұрын
Don't forget that leads to smokeless powder for propelling bullets replacing gunpowder (yes gunpowder only refers to black powder).
@datmedic2857
5 жыл бұрын
@@flare9757 hey don't kill my dream
@kitsychan
8 жыл бұрын
umm this is going to sound strange but... guns wouldn't exist until 16-1700's. Starting in the 1580, its realized that "Air pressure" and steam pressure can fire a projectile with deadly force. used sparingly at first by nobles, air rifles and air cannons, would be seen as a novelty. by 1770 European countries would have special sniper groups equipped with powerful air rifles likes the girandoni Air rifle. With early industrialization and steam engines, larger cannon rounds could be produced, that would allow the destruction of city walls from greater and greater distances. City cannons would benefit from large stationary steam plants that would allow for rapid fire low caliber projectiles or large caliber cannon. But advancing armies would also be able to use "armored rail cars" and track based steam cannons. City siege warfare would take on a new feel as first an army would dig in near a city trading long range sniper fire as engineers laid down the tracks for the large rail guns to be moved up. with the advent of gas engines, compressed air canisters, and gas compressors would speed the loading time and volume of fire, without requiring the steam engines, allowing for much faster mobile warfare that is not bound by the tracks. before you nay say it, yes, in 1580 Air rifles WERE being used and yes by 1770 sniper units made great use of them. Lack of gunpowder likely wouldn't stop later explosives from being made either. so air cannons firing high explosive charges is possible. And the idea of units hooking up air hoses to rifles and lining up in rows to fire volley after volley is possible. it would also likely "push" the invention of electromagnetic weapons faster as cities saught for other defenses with longer ranges.
@Perkinator104
8 жыл бұрын
I actually had never heard of theses air rifles from the 1700's and before for a long time. You make an amazing point. I think maybe this technology would have been more deadly in it's primitive form than early guns (faster to reload).
@103035icle
8 жыл бұрын
uh. the chinese were using bamboo guns in the 1100s. also. theres handgonnes.
@kitsychan
8 жыл бұрын
yes but the assumption is... gunpowder/guns didn't come about... my point however was.. Steam and air pressure guns came about too... they were just discarded since gunpowder was easy to make and so plentiful. BUT there were other explosives other the gunpowder later on. And assuming you didn't have chemical propellant, you would still have things including... Tanks that used their on compressors to fire guns, and even spring loaded piston launched projectiles. Before you disregard the idea of spring loaded weapons... Some were used during ww2... to throw anti-tank or anti-personal bombs without smoke or flash to give away the position.
@103035icle
8 жыл бұрын
kitsychan yep. The problom with all of thoes options is carrying it dosent work to well. Its the same thing with gasoline today. Its used because the amount of energy in a small package is enormous.
@kitsychan
8 жыл бұрын
in the 1700's they used backpack tanks with something like a bike pump, pumping it up 100 times or so to get 10 shots. But without gunpowder tech would have evolved around that. If you could picture at first horse drawn carts with steam engine compressors withhoses running out to lines of troops. Firing from the static point till the enemy got close then unhooking from the static, hooking into their backpack and charging for close combat with bayonet and the last 10 shots in their packs. Ships using larger air cannons and pneumatic air cannons producing tons of pressure to fire a slugs miles. Tech would evolve around "plug in" weapons. meaning things like Rail guns would be a natural evolution since plug in concept would be engraved in the weapon users psyche's.
@VoVilliaCorp
Жыл бұрын
Imagine tanks with catapult and ballista turrets that used hydraulics to launch projectiles
@GhostChild808
7 жыл бұрын
if gunpowder never existed, then it'd be like the AMC show, Into The Badlands
@jasonwalker2655
7 жыл бұрын
Rowell Ganancial Nooo bloody way it would, if it suddenly up and vanished it may do.
@Guitarfollower22
8 жыл бұрын
If it never existed then we wouldn't have to deal with that horrendous game franchise called "Call of Duty"
@whatevr99
8 жыл бұрын
Then it would just be them fighting with swords and crossbows.
@evanglencorse
8 жыл бұрын
+whatevr99 which I would much rather have than space warfare
@stonium69
8 жыл бұрын
On the other hand imagine having all that fantasy millitary technology but every fight is a melee with steel swords.
@Lksupasteien
8 жыл бұрын
Then we wouldn't have that amazing game 'Verdun'
@gavine6833
8 жыл бұрын
+No fuck yea mate bro hmu on steam some time we can play some verdun WHISP3R is my steam name picture is a rainbow flame off a lighter
@MrMaxBoivin
2 жыл бұрын
What about no dynamite for mining and tunneling? How would that have impacted the world? Would it be a bigger impact than just no guns?
@ArmouredProductions
8 жыл бұрын
Nice 40k references!
@cheezitchar1239
8 жыл бұрын
I was just about to comment this
@Tracer_Krieg
8 жыл бұрын
Glad to see another 40k fan.
@tregast8763
8 жыл бұрын
Watch "The Lord Inquisitor Prologue" a fan movie 6 years in the making, coming fall 2017
@ArmouredProductions
8 жыл бұрын
I did, and it was awesome. FOR THE EMPEROR!
@jimmywu8652
8 жыл бұрын
In the name of the God Emperor
@juryrigged1654
6 жыл бұрын
Can we get that medieval D-day pic as a background picture?
@Jebu911
5 жыл бұрын
I can imagine the beauty of medieval style D-day. Nazi footmen on the beach waiting for the Allied men at arms to arrive while thousands of crossbows and ballistas are being fired at the landing crafts while nazi knights are riding motorcycles with lances.
@Noxempire
6 жыл бұрын
Technically Crossbow would have been more effective than the first Guns. Imagine whole armys just wielding Crossbows and doing the whole Line Infantry stuff.
@lastswordfighter
6 жыл бұрын
They did it was called volley fire. Medieval even Renaissance armies had pike and shot formations based around bow and arrows and the crossbow.
@andreia157157
6 жыл бұрын
plate and shield pretty much would make this useless
@autokrator_
5 жыл бұрын
Crossbows would still have trouble reliably penetrating plate armor.
@astralope
5 жыл бұрын
In WW2 we would be having huge landmarks made out of giant wooden arrows
@oliverschoneck7750
5 жыл бұрын
@@autokrator_ in the early days of guns that was true for them too. I mean sometimes a pistol couldnt penetrate a breastplate if it was pressed against it.
@notasovietspytrustme4392
4 жыл бұрын
The Taoists didn’t discover gunpowder Because they figured out the potion of immortality
@Pancakes26
7 жыл бұрын
How ironic, some people were trying to make something for ever lasting life, in a result that made a weapon. Which eventually evolved into a super weapon that could destroy all of humanity and possibly life.
@sanguiniustheredangel2695
5 жыл бұрын
"In the grim darkness of the 9th Century, there is only war". I see what ya did. Nice.
@lightningbolt4419
3 жыл бұрын
I dont get it
@sanguiniustheredangel2695
3 жыл бұрын
It's a reference to the setting of Warhammer 40k, but normally it reads "in the grim darkness of the 41st millennium, there is only war". Hope this helps :)
@lightningbolt4419
3 жыл бұрын
@@sanguiniustheredangel2695 thanks
@CarpeNoctem135
7 жыл бұрын
What about pneumatic guns? Or even a "vacuum cannon" type weapon? Or are we saying that in this alternate universe the idea to launch a projectile with compressed gas never gets thought up because even that would be interesting. Stealth soldiers with air powered rifles and tanks roaring with the sound of a car sized air compressor fueling up before a shot
@nickyliu8762
6 жыл бұрын
Good idea! But as you already thought, it's unlikely they stumble upon this technology, when they are unfamiliar with the concept of rifles or the Indio-American blowgun in warfare. The Windbüchse was briefly used in combat, but it never got mass produced, because it was expensive and unreliable and there was no way to reload the rifles on the battlefield.
@InfernosReaper
6 жыл бұрын
Eh, gunpowder is irrelevant to the development of steam power, so first time a bolt gets shot out of the pipe of a steam engine and kills someone, the idea will definitely be there then
@sobuysobzzy
2 жыл бұрын
4:47 is the part your looking for
@anselmenator
6 жыл бұрын
Without gunpowder, we probably would have never had dynamite. Mining would have been very different, and railroads would have probably gone around mountains rather than through...
@akezhantoleukhan2510
5 жыл бұрын
Zayac the_Engineer your comment is written with mistake, but you're right, dinamite is C6H2CH3(NO2)3
@xxthewarwithinxxo4946
5 жыл бұрын
As mentioned above, dynamite is made using nitroglycerin, not gunpowder.
@bahanadad9200
5 жыл бұрын
But we might have found how to split a attom or just egnight enough oil to explode
@phantomconcord8914
5 жыл бұрын
We will be mining like steve xD
@parasaur2
5 жыл бұрын
Griefing your friends would be a lot harder
@JarJarStudiosPlus
8 жыл бұрын
Wat if george lukis neva ecksitid? Den mesa wud not be heer!
@prylosecorsomething3194
8 жыл бұрын
that would be good
@signantwolf6502
8 жыл бұрын
a lot of people (me included) would like that very much.
@prylosecorsomething3194
8 жыл бұрын
aiden watson my point exactly
@redeye4516
8 жыл бұрын
If he had never existed, we wouldn't have the originals. I think a better scenario would be: what if George Lucas got hit by a bus and struck by lightning twelve times before he could make any Star Wars prequels?
@shiron222
8 жыл бұрын
Whoa man whoa you'll hurt Jar Jar Binks' feelings man! #GunganLivesMatter
@gordon8609
8 жыл бұрын
I love the 40k grim darkness reference. Thank you so much!!!
@gordon8609
8 жыл бұрын
*References
@chaozzenergy6272
8 жыл бұрын
+gordon davies yes
@gordon8609
8 жыл бұрын
Yes? Yes what?
@chaozzenergy6272
8 жыл бұрын
+gordon davies that you got the reference
@gordon8609
8 жыл бұрын
:0
@sgtsaltstick2729
2 жыл бұрын
Without gunpowder, we would've probably turned to pneumatic firearms. They'd be clunkier, but they'd work. We'd invent magazine-fed crossbows a whole lot earlier. We'd still have guns, they'd just be different. Crossbows would've been a lot more fashionable in this alternative universe though, that's for sure.
@Galactipod
2 жыл бұрын
Without gunpowder, we would have used another, less ideal, powder as gunpowder, naming it "gunpowder."
@sgtsaltstick2729
2 жыл бұрын
@@Galactipod But that'd still be gunpowder though.
@Galactipod
2 жыл бұрын
@@sgtsaltstick2729 What we call gunpowder would never exist. The people in that world would name another powder, that we don't call gunpowder, "gunpowder."
@spazmodicusrex6629
7 жыл бұрын
Cav-al-ry is militarized use of horses. Cal-vary is a geographic location. Just sayin'.
@muxten
7 жыл бұрын
It annoys me so flipping bad that so many pronounce it wrong, and that seemingly no one hears it. Thank you for at least having taken the time to post so that a few more might start noticing and we can get this madness stopped.
@DaReaperZ
7 жыл бұрын
Haha I noticed this as well. Calvary gets destroyed!? Oh no! Good thing I still have my cavalry.
@chaoticstorm8145
7 жыл бұрын
morten fons Calm down. It's just how he pronounces it. Even if it's wrong we still get the point.
@jwilliams703
7 жыл бұрын
It drives me nuts too. calvary lol.. jesus look up the word. its cavalry.
@stevenjlovelace
7 жыл бұрын
Came here to say this. I remember being corrected in school, and I still think twice before saying or writing the word.
@SephirothRyu
7 жыл бұрын
Without gunpowder, we'd likely have seen oil as the next major advancement in weaponry. The reinvention of "Greek fire." Flame throwers, and eventually oil-based explosives used for projectile launching instead of gunpowder. If the industrial revolution came and happened anyway, then we could very well be seeing things such as "tanks" that are fitted with flamethrowers, battering rams, and potentially even some sort of pile-driver jousting equipment for all we know. Tanks in our timeline evolved in response to the standstill of trench warfare, but in this alternate timeline they could potentially get developed earlier to combat the similar standstill of sieging city walls (which gunpowder had effectively broken in our timeline). If anything, this no-gunpowder timeline might have a remarkably large amount in common with "steampunk" settings. The diminished range of oil-based explosives being used to propel things might also even also result in things like airships being a more viable platform, although that one is probably debatable.
@SephirothRyu
7 жыл бұрын
Also, ranged naval combat would still likely come to be. Take some "Greek Fire" or a similar oil-based concoction (you can imagine at being similar to napalm, really), apply it to a cloth, and fire said cloth at enemy vessels with ballistae. Even with cannons, ships neglected to actually armor up with full metal armor until after the industrial revolution because ships that use that much metal would simply be unfeasible. These "fire ballistae" would be of lesser effect against stone walls, but they would be potentially devastating against ships, and an arms race to create the most accurate and long ranged fire-flinging weapons would occur, much like the similar arms race with cannons. Only, once the industrial revolution came around, we would not rebound back from close-range battles again as quickly. in our timeline, cannon technology got stronger than ironclad armor after a bit, but there was a short time where cannons were not very effective against ship armor, but in this alternate timeline this may take longer to get back out of close range combat again, potentially waiting for "steam ballistae" to become strong enough to pierce through such armor, setting fire to internal ship systems.
@hmhbanal
4 жыл бұрын
10:04, however, they would still use “Greek fire”, if they found out its secrer recipe.
@ervinm.5065
7 жыл бұрын
Today we would have computerized armored exoskeletons and eletronic swords, missiles and bombs would still be a thing because they use other chemicals insted of gunpowder, crossbow would throw metallic arrows through magnetic fiels and steam engines would be used to launch spears
@miskakopperoinen8408
7 жыл бұрын
Or we would simply, you know, have skipped the gunpowder (Black powder) entirely, and just have discovered white powder, cordite and/or smokeless powder (Or any other of the numerous tried and abandoned propellants), and small arms would still be elaborate pipes used to project small pieces of lead at other people at significant speed. Seriously, modern propellants have nothing to do with black powder, and as a matter of fact, we have actually lost the original method of creating black powder. We have modern approximations, but not enough original material. In a sense we live in a world without gunpowder because of that.
@anon9579
8 жыл бұрын
Guys getting out of an apc with swords
@mistery1468
8 жыл бұрын
APCs without cannons?
@junoguten
8 жыл бұрын
APCs with lance turrets and spear ports that you aim and try to hit people with while driving.
@mistery1468
8 жыл бұрын
junoguten 10/10. xD Seriously i think that it would be more like powerful air cannons idk
@junoguten
8 жыл бұрын
mistery1468 Softguns firing poison darts at people at 600 rounds per minute :^)
@elgostine
8 жыл бұрын
we'd see development of personal crossbow artillery... perhaps some form of repeating crossbows in an artillery function like some greek designs, with the renaissance focus on hellenism in the 14th century, theyd crack the secrets of the reppeating ballista and maybe make it smaller
@christopher32074
2 жыл бұрын
There’s an object that’s not a weapon that uses gunpowder which is a powder actuated driver. It uses gunpowder which explodes to force the fasteners in tough surfaces like thick concrete and metal. Also fireworks during New Year and Independence Day use gunpowder. So does dynamite for mining.
@halo3elite508
5 жыл бұрын
Humans kill eachother no matter what, and I pretty sure we would've found another way to kill eachother! I mean we're pretty good at that XD.
@crwydryny
8 жыл бұрын
problem is gunpower is only one explosive, there are many other explosives that were discovered over time, all that would happen with out gunpower is our technology would be delayed a little, for example by WW1 british armies used cordite, and before it nitrocelulose based explosives were common, we would have still developed guns, just much later and with different technology also naval warfare hasn't been about raming since the classical era, ships would carry archers ballistae and catapults before they had cannons. boarding actions were a last resort, even after gun powder was invented the british navy used archers a lot (mary rose for example)
@rutrem09
8 жыл бұрын
Byzantium used Greek fire with excellent results against Arabs ...especially in naval warfare, because the mixture was burning also on water. Flamethrower and grenades was built to use effectively the unknown mixture used in this sort of weapons.
@islamburning4042
8 жыл бұрын
+rutrem09 Toilet Paper is effective against Arabs too.
@suntansight608
8 жыл бұрын
plain and simple, without gun powder, technology such as electricity would haved never been found. you would still be living in europe dealing with the muslim attacks invading europe. you would still be living in medieval days and horses, no cars no pollution. and of course the white man race would be in jeopardy and on the endangered species list.
@crwydryny
8 жыл бұрын
Sun Tan Sight people have been aware of electricity since 2750BCE to the point that ancient egyptian texts actually talk about the effects of electric fish, and greek texts talk about the use of such fish in medical fields by having people touch the fish in hopes that the shock will cure their ailments, there are even greek texts detailing the affects of electricity and how it could be conducted through metal objects. then you have the bagdad battery which is believed to be as old as 224BCE and there have even been discovered electroplated objects dating from this time meaning that people had some understanding of electricity, there is even evidence to support the theory that they were used in electro-therapy then you have william gilbert's experiments with amber that led to electricity, which had nothing to do with gunpowder (he was studying an effect recorded in ancient greek texts) so without gunpowder we would have still developed electricity, as for cars. the internal combustion engine, and by extention the steam engine also were not affected by the development of gunpowder (we've actually had steam power since at least the 15BCE though we never bothered developing it until the 1100s) the only thing gunpowder would have affected is the development of weapons (we'd be used bows and swords for longer and would have (until the development of nitroglycerine in the 1860s and nitrocellulose in 1863, which would have made guncotton which was discovered by accident) meaning that WW1 would have been fought with primitive firearms (hand cannons, and medieval style muskets and cannons alongside swords and lances) and the development of rockets (as the first rockets used a gunpowder based propellent) so yes we'd still have cars, we'd still have planes we'd still have electricity, but our weapon technology would probably be stunted but given the developments in other sciences they wouldn't be stunted that much (we'd probably now be reaching WW2 level technology in terms of guns and explosives). in the grand scheme of things gunpowder wouldn't really affect all that much. if anything glass is much more technologically important in terms of development as without it just about all our science would stop dead or be very stunted
@NanoScream
8 жыл бұрын
+crwydryny The problem with the use of other forms of explosive contents is that we would have to have an idea of an explosive product. So if gunpowder wasn't invented we wouldn't think to try to create other forms of explosions.
@pepsicoladodo
4 жыл бұрын
The guy with a netherite sword
@0ddba11Sp0r7s
8 жыл бұрын
So, without gun powder, Trump's idea of a wall wouldn't be that bad?
@Krescentwolf
8 жыл бұрын
That depends.... the Mongols --still-- managed to conquer china, even with the Great Wall in their way. It just took them much longer. XD
@beans4269
8 жыл бұрын
build the wall!
@Protester19
8 жыл бұрын
no wall cannot be scaled...
@rabasi8330
8 жыл бұрын
+Protestor19 Spiderman disagrees
@0ddba11Sp0r7s
8 жыл бұрын
I don't know if you guys get it or not, so I'll just say it right now; the post I made was a joke. Keep that in mind before you guys keep discussing. Thanks. :)
@Fenris77
7 жыл бұрын
Maybe like in Fallout/Warhammer 40K/Mutant Chronicles we'd have swords and spears and arrows with more advanced technology like sensors like targetting sensors (Don't ask what for). We may still have invented flame weapons though like flamethrowers/flamebombs and eventually oil would be important to military technology.
@Wrenvibin
3 жыл бұрын
Eventually we’d probably invent railguns, coilguns, or some other form of energy ranged weapon, maybe even some sort of supermassive catapult or a modernized trebuchet
@Kj16V
8 жыл бұрын
1:09 "Stoopid Mongoweans! you broke my sheety wall!!"
@KlausValk
8 жыл бұрын
hey cody , can you do a "What if the Mongol Empire never fell"
@KlausValk
8 жыл бұрын
by that i mean it didn't turn to 4 kingdoms
@Yuki_Francisco
8 жыл бұрын
The problem is at the core;Mongol succession of power.
@MrDUneven
8 жыл бұрын
Let's expect there were no problems with the succession.
@monkeyorful
8 жыл бұрын
It was already made by him
@shaunmitchell9956
8 жыл бұрын
yes
@ultimatestoryteller
7 жыл бұрын
Imagine US during the Gulf War , having all those computer missile system being replaced with a Computer Arrow releasing system . Funny as hell !
@georgehh2574
6 жыл бұрын
And the massive arrow splits into smaller ones which pepper the ground
@georgehh2574
6 жыл бұрын
SAIBAL CLUB Fighter jets shooting arrows xD
@cosmo4698
6 жыл бұрын
George Hamvas Hummerich Shit, I’d pay to watch that.
@HacksignKT
6 жыл бұрын
aha lel +2
@taliakellegg5978
6 жыл бұрын
George Hamvas Hummerich a nuke that shoots swords
@phoenix331
2 жыл бұрын
Imagine trench warfare with swords and crossbows lol
@fredjohnson9833
4 ай бұрын
Without gunpowder, I'm not sure trench warfare would be all that common
@crazyMLC
8 жыл бұрын
Gunpowder isn't necessary for airplanes, so... airplane carpet arrowing? Airplanes that fly so high up that they can't be shot down by anything on the ground? Small ballistas turrets mounted onto the underside of planes?
@Rammstein0963
8 жыл бұрын
Napalm bombs COULD be used, no gunpowder, just chemicals
@dataweaver
8 жыл бұрын
gunpowder isn't necessary for airplanes; but combustion engines are. In particular, any technology that allows for an internal combustion engine necessarily allows for guns.
@crazyMLC
8 жыл бұрын
dataweaver I mean, electricity would probably still eventually be discovered, and it's not like gasoline stops existing.
@jakob321123
8 жыл бұрын
You know pretty much no modern bomb uses gunpowder so nothing would change. Also nuclear bombs
Пікірлер: 12 М.