Hate to make a /pol/-tier thread, but as far as European vs. Asiatic achievements in the realm of firearms, which do you think is objectively better - occidental or oriental?



(Picrel) left pic is Greek fire and right pic is a Chinese gunpowder rocket (they usually affixed them to a spear tip).

>>57911904 (OP)

Always the west.

>>57911904 (OP)

Wasn't Greek fire an incendiary weapon mounted to ships as opposed to a propellant?

>>57911904 (OP)

Its kind of hard to look past that time all the western powers decided to invade china over opium and only like one in 5 chinese soldiers had a firearm

China when it fought with the west had pissed away all of it's historical strengths. In various periods they had admirable archers, or common firearms, or very powerful crossbows (I'm not talking about the repeater meme). They threw it all in the garbage.

>>57911904 (OP)

European and its not even a question 

Especially that its humiliating for asian/mongoloids because they were the first to have it

>>57911904 (OP)

That depends on the period. Unlike Africa, European and Asian civilizations have been capable of creating great technologies. Some eras were better than others for either "side". To go "which is better" in a yes/no question spanning thousands of years and countless numbers of countries/dynasties/etc is silly.

Seconding the crossbows, they were legitimately pretty potent (and cool) and it's a shame that the've been so heavily sidelined in favor of "wow machine gun bow :O"

What about the Roman ballista?

>>57911904 (OP)

No idea how historically accurate this image is but I always thought it was funny

>>57911904 (OP)

China accidentally discovered (not invented) gunpowder and then proceeded to waste it for centuries.

Europeans got it and improved its usage tenfold in a few years.

The large Chinese crossbow is impressive because of it's length of draw, and the wide span of it's bow arms. While still being operated by a single man and supposedly faster to draw than a winch operated crossbow, it was at least as powerful as any longbow or arbalest. Through the use of this weapon China was able to not only magnify the wounding potential of infantry, but also to challenge cavalry archers that had historically dominated the battlefield.



The scorpion, while I really like it, was under-utilized due to its bulk, ultimately.

They started out using gunpowder for bullshit, used it effectively for a while, then basically threw away their progress and went back to using it for bullshit.

>>57911904 (OP)

the chinese didn't invent gunpowder

the mongols did maybe



look it up yourself and you'll see piss all historical information, just alot of modern stuff pointing to china

You forgot to mention that Chinese/Korean/Japanese black powder weapons were all matchlock. The white man added a trigger to it.

fpbp

You're comparing two unlike things. Greek Fire was used out of a mounted "turret." Chink Death Firecrackers were anti-infantry and could be deployed almost like modern mortars. And the "anti infantry" aspect was more psychological, if not equal to the ability to kill stuff.



I don't know. I think Greeks and Byzantines, overall, had way better weapons and armor, as well as better naval capabilities...at certain periods, that is.
