power draw and crossbows
- Thread starter kjeltringen
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Nierra just for the record no one puts a knife blade/ chainsaw blade on a sniper rifle, because snipers aren't meant to be in close range of their targets.
If you want a repeating crossbow find vanhelsings crossbow, light weight and shoots multiple bolts, plus easy to reload. I actually have it in my game
, though it still does like 30 dmg, while my bow is one shoting.
If you want a repeating crossbow find vanhelsings crossbow, light weight and shoots multiple bolts, plus easy to reload. I actually have it in my game
, though it still does like 30 dmg, while my bow is one shoting.
Nierra
Regular
AnddyiRaynor said:Nierra just for the record no one puts a knife blade/ chainsaw blade on a sniper rifle, because snipers aren't meant to be in close range of their targets.
If you want a repeating crossbow find vanhelsings crossbow, light weight and shoots multiple bolts, plus easy to reload. I actually have it in my game
Chainsaw if for close combat. You just have no idea of Grim Future of the 41st millennium....
Btw, I've not wanted any crossbow. I am fine with bows - fast and elegant. But there're these certain people that keep asking for them.
bobknight
Sergeant at Arms
noosers said:
They should take out the strength requirement for crossbows.
You don't need to be strong to operate a cranequin and you certainly don't need to be strong to pull a trigger.
That would make it fair I think.
Crossbows represent a non-committed fighter's weapon, it should require no skill investment to use (just like real crossbows).
Operating the crossbow may be easy and fast to learn - the same is true for a rifle.
Hitting something, now that takes a good amount of practise as well. So what makes you think it was mainly untrained peons who shot crossbows? Usually it were highly professional soldiers who knew their trade. Or why do you think Italian mercenaries like the Genoese Crossbowmen were highly sought after?
The STR requirements for crossbows are for pure balancing issues. STR 18 is relatively easily obtained, if you´re dedicated enough you can hit it on level 2 or 3, depending on your starting choices. Lowering them could be an option, though.
And forget the crap about arrows insta-penetrating all the armour a knight wore. Had it been the case people has ceased to use armour at all. There´s a reason why bowmen aimed for horses and weak spots. And had the French had a stronger King with more sense, history would tell you exactly that instead of creating the myth of uber archers killing anything. True, archers broke the charge, but the butchering was done in melee by both men at arms and archers using their side weapons.
By the time you can think about penetrating a suit of good mid-late medieval armour with your ranged weapon you´re dead because the cavalry/knight is upon you.
Unfortunately MnB has a different concept there. But well, it´s a game, no medieval battle simulator and the creators favoured archery. It happes, but it´s still a great game.
Hitting something, now that takes a good amount of practise as well. So what makes you think it was mainly untrained peons who shot crossbows? Usually it were highly professional soldiers who knew their trade. Or why do you think Italian mercenaries like the Genoese Crossbowmen were highly sought after?
The STR requirements for crossbows are for pure balancing issues. STR 18 is relatively easily obtained, if you´re dedicated enough you can hit it on level 2 or 3, depending on your starting choices. Lowering them could be an option, though.
And forget the crap about arrows insta-penetrating all the armour a knight wore. Had it been the case people has ceased to use armour at all. There´s a reason why bowmen aimed for horses and weak spots. And had the French had a stronger King with more sense, history would tell you exactly that instead of creating the myth of uber archers killing anything. True, archers broke the charge, but the butchering was done in melee by both men at arms and archers using their side weapons.
By the time you can think about penetrating a suit of good mid-late medieval armour with your ranged weapon you´re dead because the cavalry/knight is upon you.
Unfortunately MnB has a different concept there. But well, it´s a game, no medieval battle simulator and the creators favoured archery. It happes, but it´s still a great game.
bobknight
Sergeant at Arms
Just because crossbowmen are easy to train does not mean there is a low skill limit on them. However, it does mean that it is trivial to make a man effective in combat with a crossbow. While he may not be able to peg a man at 400 yards with his crossbow, he can fire volley well enough and reload with sufficient speed to pour fire downrange. THAT is the whole point of volley firing.
The Genoese are well paid only partially due to their ability to fire rapidly and accurately with a crossbow, they are also well trained in the military arts in general and have excellent discipline as well as being well armed and armoured for auxiliary troops. They may not be all that much more efficient at using their crossbows at killing things but they are better and more reliable soldiers than a common rabble with a siege crossbow.
The Genoese are well paid only partially due to their ability to fire rapidly and accurately with a crossbow, they are also well trained in the military arts in general and have excellent discipline as well as being well armed and armoured for auxiliary troops. They may not be all that much more efficient at using their crossbows at killing things but they are better and more reliable soldiers than a common rabble with a siege crossbow.
If you want a real life comparison...
Crossbow
Pros:
1. More range than a long bow
2. More power on each shot than a long bow (more likely to pierce armor)
3. Much easier to master compared to the longbow.
Cons:
1. Much slower to reload
2. Much more expensive and complicated to manufacture and upkeep.
3. Can't be unstrung to protect the string during bad weather (wet string = less tension = less power and range). Right before the battle of Crecy it rained. The English archers unstrung their bows and kept the strings dry, while the Genoese crossbowmen on the French side couldn't. When the attack happened the wet crossbows were outclassed by the dry longbows.
Longbow:
Pros:
1. Easier and cheaper to manufacture and repair.
2. Can shoot much faster than a crossbow.
3. Can be unstrung.
Cons:
1. Takes years of training to master.
2. Less power than a crossbow, though bodkin arrows could sometimes pierce run of the mill armor.
Noosers is right though on the tactics side. At every famous English victory in the hundred years war (Crecy, Poiters, Agincourt) bad French tactics and stupidity played a large role in the outcomes.
Crossbow
Pros:
1. More range than a long bow
2. More power on each shot than a long bow (more likely to pierce armor)
3. Much easier to master compared to the longbow.
Cons:
1. Much slower to reload
2. Much more expensive and complicated to manufacture and upkeep.
3. Can't be unstrung to protect the string during bad weather (wet string = less tension = less power and range). Right before the battle of Crecy it rained. The English archers unstrung their bows and kept the strings dry, while the Genoese crossbowmen on the French side couldn't. When the attack happened the wet crossbows were outclassed by the dry longbows.
Longbow:
Pros:
1. Easier and cheaper to manufacture and repair.
2. Can shoot much faster than a crossbow.
3. Can be unstrung.
Cons:
1. Takes years of training to master.
2. Less power than a crossbow, though bodkin arrows could sometimes pierce run of the mill armor.
Noosers is right though on the tactics side. At every famous English victory in the hundred years war (Crecy, Poiters, Agincourt) bad French tactics and stupidity played a large role in the outcomes.
I don't see a crossbow out ranging a longbow.
Waldakoks
Regular
Crossbows dont have longer shot range by any means, they couldnt shoot in big arch like bows. If you would shot in too big arch with crossbow, it would be as efficient as bow, just heavier, slower, more expensive, also less accurate due to shorter projectile. And still lower range.
IS duskfall really the best bow?
No rune? oo
Whats its stat.
And on to topic, crossbow is extremely underpower - for balance reason as many stated...
If it was on par with bow then there's no reason to use bow - pointless investment on draw/horse archery.
But because of this that means one can't main xbow. I want to use crossbow as primary but it's impossible.
The only pros and cons should be.
xbow
pros- low rate of fire, cant use/reload on horse (siege)
cons - higher dmg
bow
pros- high rate of fire
cons - weaker dmg.
Should have simply be just that...lol, a simple contrast.
But no the pro and cons have to be about investment (which i assume you can't change even if you want to).
Maybe mount and blade 2 will fix it.
No rune? oo
Whats its stat.
And on to topic, crossbow is extremely underpower - for balance reason as many stated...
If it was on par with bow then there's no reason to use bow - pointless investment on draw/horse archery.
But because of this that means one can't main xbow. I want to use crossbow as primary but it's impossible.
The only pros and cons should be.
xbow
pros- low rate of fire, cant use/reload on horse (siege)
cons - higher dmg
bow
pros- high rate of fire
cons - weaker dmg.
Should have simply be just that...lol, a simple contrast.
But no the pro and cons have to be about investment (which i assume you can't change even if you want to).
Maybe mount and blade 2 will fix it.
Duskfall is now the best bow, before the Rune bows were nerfed, the Runed bows were better. Duskfall's big advantage is the accuracy with damage close to the Emerald Bow (but better accuracy). Accuracy is incredibly important, I don't want to waste too many shots, especially since I tend to fire from distance and from horseback.
The only thing worse about X-bows is their slow rate of fire. If you allow them to fire faster, then there would be no point to bows as others pointed out. You can reload the X-bows on horse, but only certain X-bows like the Maiden.
I think what the complaints boil down to is that there is no ultra-special X-bow but there are special bows. Compare regular type bows with X-bows, The D'Shar bow vs. X-bows and I think it'll be pretty close, maybe the X-bow has the advantage. But once you add in Noldor, Runed Bows, and Duskfall, then clearly bows are better. These are special bows that are not easily gotten and take high requirements. Perhaps if there were a line of Runed X-bows, then it would all be balanced out. A Sapphire X-bow with pretty high reload (for X-bows relatively) would answer the complaints.
The only thing worse about X-bows is their slow rate of fire. If you allow them to fire faster, then there would be no point to bows as others pointed out. You can reload the X-bows on horse, but only certain X-bows like the Maiden.
I think what the complaints boil down to is that there is no ultra-special X-bow but there are special bows. Compare regular type bows with X-bows, The D'Shar bow vs. X-bows and I think it'll be pretty close, maybe the X-bow has the advantage. But once you add in Noldor, Runed Bows, and Duskfall, then clearly bows are better. These are special bows that are not easily gotten and take high requirements. Perhaps if there were a line of Runed X-bows, then it would all be balanced out. A Sapphire X-bow with pretty high reload (for X-bows relatively) would answer the complaints.
Shire
Sergeant
Aside from the inherent downsides to xbows, main factor limiting them from my own use is their total garbage accuracy mid-late game and that you can't fire a good one mounted. So if there was a magical xbow, imo it should be usable while mounted (yea yea I know, but it's magic!) and it should rival or have better accuracy than the better runed bows/duskfall.
I would make runed crossbows like this:
Ruby: Speed 30-35, accuracy 82-85, damage 180 (enough that it doesn't matter, everything dies - note that Ruby Rune Bow reaches 140 with Noldor Arrows, 10 PD and not counting scaling for 300 skill or whatever). Requires 24 strength.
Emerald: Speed ~40, accuracy ~90, damage 120 (about the same as Emerald Bow with 10 PD). Requires 20 strength.
Sapphire: Speed 50, accuracy 95, damage 100. Requires 18 strength.
Then they could be scaled up from there to find an appropriate balance, probably by lifting the speed anywhere up to half their respective bow equivalents and maybe lifting accuracy. Setting them to pierce shields may also help, though I believe steel bolts already have that.
Ruby: Speed 30-35, accuracy 82-85, damage 180 (enough that it doesn't matter, everything dies - note that Ruby Rune Bow reaches 140 with Noldor Arrows, 10 PD and not counting scaling for 300 skill or whatever). Requires 24 strength.
Emerald: Speed ~40, accuracy ~90, damage 120 (about the same as Emerald Bow with 10 PD). Requires 20 strength.
Sapphire: Speed 50, accuracy 95, damage 100. Requires 18 strength.
Then they could be scaled up from there to find an appropriate balance, probably by lifting the speed anywhere up to half their respective bow equivalents and maybe lifting accuracy. Setting them to pierce shields may also help, though I believe steel bolts already have that.
Hjolnai said:
I believe that Ruby = dmg Emerald = accuracy and sapphire = speed so sapphire in your totally unbalanced crossbow ideas shouldn't have more accuracy than an Emerald crossbow. Just balance the crossbows similar to the difference between a longbow and the rune bows that already exist in the game.
