Prehistoric technologies such as the bow and arrow, the sling, the spearthrower (woomera, atlatl, etc.) and boomerangs all provide major advantages over hand-thrown spears and rocks, and must have had a large impact on warfare. Closer to modern times, the chariot appears to have been revolutionary, rapidly spreading from Central Asia to the east, south, and west. Cavalry was also revolutionary. The transformation of warfare through the introduction of the horse is something that was seen in relatively recent historical times, when the spread of the horse through North America led to major changes in warfare (including the short-lived development of armoured cavalry with armoured horses, before the gun pushed armour off the American battlefield).

But those are relatively minor changes compared to one enormous change. Warfare is not all about weapons. Logistics matter, and manpower matters. The agricultural revolution - the switch from foraging to agriculture for the majority of food - provided an enormous increase in manpower due to higher population densities, and in many places provided food that could be stored and carried, supplying an army. Adding to the effect of this were pack animals, carts/wagons, and boats, providing a huge advance in logistics.

battlefield strategy did not dramatically transform until the introduction of gunpowder weapons

It took a long time for gunpowder weapons to dramatically transform warfare. When guns were developed in China, and when they were introduced into Europe, armies made use of infantry (often mostly using spears or other polearms), cavalry, and missiles (bow and arrow, crossbow, sling), and, especially in sieges, artillery. Apart from the gun featuring alongside the older missile weapons, or replacing them, typical early 17th century armies over much of Eurasia still consisted of infantry and cavalry (often still wearing armour) in addition to guns (and often other missile weapons).

The bayonet was revolutionary, replacing a mix of musketeers and pikemen with a single group of all-purpose infantry: the musketeer with bayonet. Not long before the widespread adoption of the bayonet, improvements in guns had led to the abandonment of most armour, and lightweight portable cannons had made gunpowder artillery a key arm on the battlefield. The 17th century saw revolutionary change in European warfare. But this was 300 years after the adoption of the gun in Europe. Was the gun as revolutionary before then as the introduction of the bow and sling must have been? As the advent of the chariot and cavalry? The revolution in warfare due to the gun is far more complex than "the introduction of the gun revolutionised warfare".

Since the 17th century, we have seen major changes in warfare, with breechloading cartridge rifles and, later, machine guns greatly increasing the firepower of infantry (and increasing the value of the pick and shovel for defence), artillery transforming from relatively short range weapons firing solid shot or cannister/grape to weapons with ranges of many kilometres firing high explosive and shrapnel shells, guided weapons, motorisation, tanks, aircraft, and many more. Among all that, nuclear weapons are sometimes mentioned as revolutionary, but warfare still continues along pre-nuclear paths, with nuclear weapons having more effect on the political arena than the battlefield.

One development that is often overlooked is radio, which transformed command and communications. Radio allowed flexible use of artillery support on demand, battlefield intelligence approaching real-time, etc.