[CefGemYAffews]

I might include the respective advents of bronze, iron, and steel weaponry, the composite bow, the stirrup, and the rifled musket.

Oh, and Greek fire. Yes.

[Enrivaanonock]

weapon = hurting tool



-Tank. reintroducing heavy cavalry.

-Machine Gun. increased infantry's firepower considerably.

[Ngdyoysv]

The chariot was certainly a big deal. The Persians had composite bows, not compound bows. Compound bows have pulleys and are a modern invention.

My list of 10 weapons or vehicles before the 20th century would be:
- Chariot
- Compound bow
- Sarissa (more aptly, pike tactics, but this will do)
- Falcata/Gladius
- Crossbow
- Greek Fire (debatable)
- Cannon
- Flintlock Musket
- Repeating Rifle
- Maxim Gun

[choollaBard]

I think it can be a bit misleading to look only at a certain weapon for much of history. Things like the bomb represent certainly a drastic change, but most often we have to count in a number of factors instead of looking only at a certain type of weapon. For example, lance or later sarissa in Hellenic warfare are hardly thinkable as the decisive thing without hoplon and phalanx tactics.

[bestformaldress23]

BeBro, I agree in part - pike tactics are obviously necessary for pike use - but in this case I think it's one of the more straightforward examples. Hoplite and phalanx tactics weren't invented by Philip, even if he did adapt them to the sarissa. A generation before, Epaminondas used complex phalanx tactics at Leuctra, including deep formations and precise maneuver that Alexander would later utilize. I would call the sarissa "history changing" because, though it (like all weapons) is only as revolutionary as the tactics it requires, it made big changes after those tactics had, for the most part, already been developed.

There seem to be two types of weapons here - those like the sarissa or the flintlock, where existing tactics are improved drastically by a new weapon or weapon technology without the tactics themselves undergoing much change, and those like the chariot or cannon, where tactics are forced to change radically to deal with a new invention. The latter are are the more "revolutionary" inventions, but it doesn't mean that they were necessarily more "history-changing" than the former type.

[Dastyh]

I thought a gladius was just a short double-edged sword. Is there some special property to it other than its use by the almighty Roman legions?

[zithromaxlinks]

Originally posted by GePap
In that TV show, the one weapon that I thought trully appropriate was the AK-47. Cheap atumotic rifles have done more for warfare in the last 50 years than any billion dollar weapon system. Yep, If you want a weapon of Mass Destruction, look at the PLA Type 56(Chinese AK-47)

[tussinelde]

Originally posted by Geronimo


Given that the AK-47 and it's derivatives are so decisively superior I wonder why NATO doesn't adopt it or a NATO knock off as their standard infantry weapon? If the weapon is clearly superior then any considerations of cost to convert would seem to be secondary. Well, it isn't superior, for one. It's superior in that it's much cheaper and doesn't require as much cleaning. It isn't as accurate, and has one mother of a recoil(which, of course, affects accuracy).

It was designed for unlettered peasants, and it shows in the users.

[Jesslovers]

You all forget the most important weapon: the Phased-plasma rifle in the forty watt range.

ACK!

[attlawqa]

Sharpened rock.

[timgreyuvcz]

How about the Interrupter Gear

[Efksqhyu]

10.) The Spear
9.) The Chariot
8.) The Sword
7.) Cavalry
6.) The Pike
5.) The Musket
4.) The Cannon
3.) The Airplane
2.) The Missle
1.) The Mind

[LypeReexy]

Thebne

[Bwvapays]

Originally posted by LordShiva
Teh pen is mightier. The pen is directed by the mind!

[mikaelluioy]

The deadly joke, although not many people know about its involvement in WW2

[Frdsdx26]

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/172863/new_age_weapons/


more in YouTube.

[Argurnenoni]

BFG

[AncewwewBus]

Originally posted by Bosh
Gotta be stirrups, can't have knights and whatnot without those. But are stirrups a weapon?

The whole question is a bit ill-defined.

[neotheMit]

Strictly speaking, can you count prehistorical weapons as having changed history?

[Lt_Apple]

the boulton Paul Defiant