Bows/Crossbows Overpowerd ore underpowerd

[RF Nigth]

I feel i need to post this ( I Now its many post, Suggestions about the Archery)

Now i tested my 30pound hickory Recurv bow From 6metre against Ethafoam Hard 15cm thick.
Ethafoam

whit a point as this

It penetrated straight through 25cm in And stuck in the wall.. No doubt it would penetrated a human stomach ore upper part of body..
A friend shoot a Car whit a 100pound Long bow (whit Bodkin) it penetrated Both front car doors, yet a Car door is now good thing to compare whit armor...

And i Played M&B to day shoot a Sea Raider in the head 2 times in the body 3 times, No helmet , leather vest thingy 25armor Whit a 26damage Long bow And 2+penetrate barbed arrow...The fifth arrow killed him.

Chinese/Steppe Nomad composite bow could cut through euro style armor at 200 yards easily. ""Even the most 'protective' European plate armour can still be pierced through by crossbow bolts or bow arrows."
But be be decisively superior by the late 15th century
No i cant say that this source is Reliable.

Gerald of Wales:

...in the war against the Welsh, one of the men of arms was struck by an arrow shot at him by a Welshman. It went right through his thigh, high up, where it was protected inside and outside the leg by his iron cuises, and then through the skirt of his leather tunic; next it penetrated that part of the saddle which is called the Alva or seat; and finally it lodged in his horse, driving so deep that it killed the animal. (Itinerarium Cambriae, (1191))


But I have to say That this Bows in M&B resemble a 25#pound bow, many traditional bows we use to day don't compete whit those bow used..
As many have says they where from 70#pound to 150#

I think that it should exist heavier Bows that require more powerdraw as 10 and up..

And The Arrows
The accuracy should not be at the Bows it should be at the arrow.
You lower quality on the arrow the more crappy shots, yo better the better shoots.

As the Turkish Flight Arrows whit a low profile
The maximum flight record set by Turkish archers, shooting in the conventional manner, seems to have been at least 874 yards,

The English long bow Archer Was able to fire 8 arrows per minute Whether No ore Yes, they used a shooting glow, tab and archer's braces.
they would not wear Gauntlets that would lower there speed to 3 arrows per minute..

And as the Mongolian/Turkish way to shoot whit tumbring. And bigger flat nok on arrows there speed per minute was greater...

Finally i suggest
That
   
heavier Bows that require more powerdraw (as have bean suggested before)

Crossbows do more Damage

arrows do more Damage

different arrows whit different accuracy (quality ore quantity)

the use off heavy glows such as Gauntlets would higher the speed off reloading time

a Archer's clothes whit arm Braces Ore bone protection thing.. Perhaps a shooting glow tab? medieval hood??
like

At main M&B Game menu A short brief about the different weapons found in M&B and history about them.
Perhaps not really necessary



   







   

 

[Merentha]

I will point out that penetration does not directly equate to damage.  An arrow through the shoulder will hurt, but its not taking anyone down.  Hell, I've been shot in the shoulder and was fine-ish.  I was twelve at the time, so it did have me crying, but comparing my pain tolerance then and now, I think I can safely say that if my life depended on it, a shoulder-shot would not take me out of a fight. 

I'll also say that 6 meters is incredibly close-range, and that a car door is not in any way analogous to armor.  Car doors are amazingly weak things, being made of little more than sheet metal and plastic backing. 

 

[Ingolifs]

Still, i'm in agreement that bows and crossbows are in serious need of unnerfing. Especially with a powerful bow, shots to an unarmoured head or torso should be mostly fatal.

 

[mouthnhoof]

Damage increased, but accuracy reduced - especially mounted accuracy.

 

[Darian]

If you use a War Bow (28p damage), Khergit/Bodkin Arrows (damage +3), a Power Draw of 5 or 6, and about 150-200 points in Archery it's ridiculously easy to score immensely damaging headshots. It's still not one-hit kills, but the damage is high enough to make up for it.

If you stick with a Power Draw of 2 or 3, then yes bows are quite nerfed.

 

[RF Nigth]

At: Merentha what did you get shoot by

At: mouthnhoof Damage increased, but accuracy reduced - especially mounted accuracy.

WY would a heavy bow be minor accuracy
Heavy bow but longer draw time. Whit the horse Archer i agree that the accuracy should be low .

At: Darian If you use a War Bow (28p damage), Khergit/Bodkin Arrows (damage +3), a Power Draw of 5 or 6, and about 150-200 points in Archery it's ridiculously easy to score immensely damaging headshots. It's still not one-hit kills, but the damage is high enough to make up for it.

A bow got a max draw if you over draw it. It will break.(so by level up power draw over requirement will damage the bow) okej I am little pedantic
Still the bows are not Near the level off what they where...

 

[rageshrub]

but in terms of balance, the horse archer has the ability to move away quickly from any approaching enemies. and the foot archer has the advantage of being a fair way back from any enemies coming his way.
i know i'd be pissed if i was going at an archer and was killed by one arrow which went right through a shield and plate armour

maybe there could be different classes of arrows, eg: big, powerful arrows to be fired from a mammoth of a bow which can nail a man to a tree and also smaller arrows which can be loaded faster, do less damage but come in larger packs (40-50?)

just a thought...

 

[PDJ]

Archery is fine the way it is.

With anything above a shortbow you can kill a river pirate in 1-2 hits, you don't even need headshots.  With a warbow I can take out a swadian knight with 2-5 body shots or 1-2 head shots.

 

[bobsters34]

Archery is fine the way it is.

With anything above a shortbow you can kill a river pirate in 1-2 hits, you don't even need headshots.

Well duh you have been able to take out river pirates with 1 or 2 shots for a long time.

With a warbow I can take out a swadian knight with 2-5 body shots or 1-2 head shots.

If you got shot in the head im pretty sure you'd be dead.

 

[PDJ]

If you got shot in the head im pretty sure you'd be dead.

Insightful.

I am not wearing a big metal helmet or in a video game.  Swadian Knights are in a video game and are wearing big metal helmets.

 

[Jon Snow]

Insightful.

I am not wearing a big metal helmet or in a video game.  Swadian Knights are in a video game and are wearing big metal helmets.

Exactly. Helmets are good, y'know.

 

[Volkier]

Still, i'm in agreement that bows and crossbows are in serious need of unnerfing. Especially with a powerful bow, shots to an unarmoured head or torso should be mostly fatal.

I would actually have to somewhat disagree. Head - yes. Torso, most likely not. Keep in mind that majority of lower-body organ failure isn't instant death - although a shot through the torso would probably eventually kill, it wouldn't cause an immediate death.

To be completely honest, I am actually quite happy with the way archery currently is. With the exception of that the graphical aspect of arrows make them stick way too deep into solid objects and horses (the arrow practically goes in all the way up to the feathers).

 

[fisheye]

Archery's been souped up since .808. Much better accuracy and damage, is good now.

 

[Feanaro]

I think many people OVER estimate the power of bows. Most weren't near the power of a longbow or crossbow. Jean De Joinville describes Crusaders being riddled with Arab arrows and surviving, thanks to their armor. A few dozen layers of linen can take a lot of the punch out of an arrow.

Especially with a powerful bow, shots to an unarmoured head or torso should be mostly fatal.

Physiologically, instant death from a torso wound isn't likely unless you destroy the heart. Even if you cut the carotid right in twain, there's still be about twelve seconds worth of oxygen in your man's brain. Not long to live but it might be long enough to take you wi' him. In the more likely event of a less than clean cut, he might'nt push up the daisies for several minutes.

However, many people are apt to quit playing when they start getting shot full of sharp thingies. Psychological stops can occur, either because the shootee chooses to take his ball and pass out/have a quick break or because he figures it's time to die.

 

[RF Nigth]

hum the plate armor could have a bonus against arrows like the two handed weapons....
but the plate armour is not 5mm thick over all it would be to heavy then...as the bodkin arrows got problem to penetrate 5mm thick armor
Dunno hove the later Bodkin arrows that where more blunted function against plate?
yet the English fleet used long bows to 1700 and the Ottoman 1800...

I must post this to funny http://www.wwiihistorymagazine.com/2005/july/col-profiles.html 
Edit: last time some one get killed in battle by a Long bow

 

[Ingolifs]

Still, i'm in agreement that bows and crossbows are in serious need of unnerfing. Especially with a powerful bow, shots to an unarmoured head or torso should be mostly fatal.

I would actually have to somewhat disagree. Head - yes. Torso, most likely not. Keep in mind that majority of lower-body organ failure isn't instant death - although a shot through the torso would probably eventually kill, it wouldn't cause an immediate death.

To be completely honest, I am actually quite happy with the way archery currently is. With the exception of that the graphical aspect of arrows make them stick way too deep into solid objects and horses (the arrow practically goes in all the way up to the feathers).

I think many people OVER estimate the power of bows. Most weren't near the power of a longbow or crossbow. Jean De Joinville describes Crusaders being riddled with Arab arrows and surviving, thanks to their armor. A few dozen layers of linen can take a lot of the punch out of an arrow.

Especially with a powerful bow, shots to an unarmoured head or torso should be mostly fatal.

Physiologically, instant death from a torso wound isn't likely unless you destroy the heart. Even if you cut the carotid right in twain, there's still be about twelve seconds worth of oxygen in your man's brain. Not long to live but it might be long enough to take you wi' him. In the more likely event of a less than clean cut, he might'nt push up the daisies for several minutes.

However, many people are apt to quit playing when they start getting shot full of sharp thingies. Psychological stops can occur, either because the shootee chooses to take his ball and pass out/have a quick break or because he figures it's time to die.

In M&B, there is no bleeding damage/wound system allowing torso shots to be fatal but not instantly. It would be nice if there were, but there aren't. Accordingly, if a shot is to be fatal in-game, it must be instantly fatal.

 

[Luthius]

You could be picky and introduce different arrow properties based upon their fletchlings. To explain; arrows with larger flights experience more drag than those with small flights, reducing their range and impact speed (and hence damage/AP value). They would however be more accurate in flight as the larger flight reduces the movement of the arrow through the air, preventing it from straying as far from the intended course.

I would assume that bodkin arrows, meant for their armour piecing abilities, would have smaller flights than khergit arrows which, as mainly shot from horseback at close range, benefit more from the added accuracy, but do not lose out on power, as at closer range the power is nearly the same. The accuracy could be considered to be similar at closer range as well, but I'd think that arrows fired from horseback would benefit much more from increased stability, than range/damage. Bodkin arrows are designed with impact damage in mind. In fact the smaller heads on bodkin arrows probably mean that less fletchling is needed to maintain stability anyway, but I'm not entirely sure. They may travel quicker than other arrows but fall quicker too.

I know this is a little point, but seems to be somewhat on topic. I'd say that bodkin arrows should be more damaging that khergit arrows at the moment in game, but khergits should get an accuracy bonus. (whether any of this works or not in game is already I don't know)

I do however, seemingly against what I've previously stated, think that bodkin arrows should get a damage reduction but have a higher armour piercing potential than normal arrows. This reflects the fact that they were small headed, designed more to pierce armour than to cause as much damage as possible, like normal arrows. Then a player could select their arrows dependent upon what type of enemy they were fighting.

 

[Dionesios]

The sources I've read have said that crossbows were able to pierce armor, but not much else was by the high medieval period.  Spikes on maces, etc.  It was highly unlikely for a knight in plate to sustain wounds that would kill him, sans infection perhaps, so I've read in books on the subject.  But even farther back as the Roman times, skirmish troops were more for inflicting casualties on troops already broken than really kill standing soldiers, due to shields and frontal armor.

That being said, I'm sure there could have been a guy with a super powerful bow that inflicted the injury you're citing.  The English Longbow, for example, was an exception, but you had to possess certain things to even fire the English Longbow, namely a three finger draw.  That's wehre the middle finger comes from.  The French had no counter for the long bow in the 100 year war, so they started cutting off captives middle fingers so they couldn't serve as archers again.  To taunt them the archers started flipping them the bird.

You have to remember with your bow, the guy who made it, assuming it was a guy and not an industrialized process, was doubtfully using the tools and supplies available in the middle ages.  Bows weren't standardized like they are now, no equipment was.  Shoes and clothing weren't even affordable to the masses like they are now until industrialization.  It all had to be hand sewn or cobbled.  So when you're talking about troops who have to buy their own equipment, 90% of the time you're hardly looking at master fletchers.

That all being said, the bows were a bit weak, I thought.  I would like to maybe see higher end bows in the game, that even if they weren't really damaging, were a little more accurate.  I was really expecting the crossbow to be a 1 shot kill to an average poorly armored soldier, and even when I hit him it tends not to kill him, and I rarely hit him.

 

[RF Nigth]

Is hard to think that a local  bowyers and Fletcher around a kingdome would sustain they arrows bow fore a entire army. eh perhaps not
But i remember to read a old shopping list. And now i can't find the sours At the time off Agincourt the arrows length was standard.
And look at Henry VIII's ship Mary Rose More than 3,500 arrows and 137 whole longbows.The bows staves recovered from the Mary Rose were made from a single baulk of yew.This wood mostly came from Italy and Spain.
I am more likely think they where masses produce

Henrys order 40,000 arrows
400armor helmet off some sort (cant remember more LOl


A nother thing
about composit bows  http://www.mediafire.com/?ecnylmydjwn

 

[Dionesios]

No, you're probably right, but when you go into a tavern or village, are you hiring troops that are standardized?  Do all your cavalry wear the same armor and use the same weapons?  Maybe that's a game feature I haven't gotten to yet, I just played to lvl 21 or so, but the types of troops raised in the type of army you're running with in game supply their own equipment, minus the guys you bring like barachus or whatever.  What I'm saying is that good bows existed, but just like good armor, they were unavailable to all but the few. 

As to the standardized procedures you're quoting, you're probably right.  I would question, with that many weapons being produced, if they were made to the quality your bow is, however.  It seems to me that if I had an army of levies, and I was equipping them, I would try not to make the weapons worth more than they are.  Those units used were there to provide a spray, not accuracy.  Standard length arrows is just so anybody can pick them up and fire them.  There is a lot of quality besides length.

I think maybe we're arguing two seperate things.  I'm not saying standardization didn't exist, or that bows shouldn't be buffed, because I think there should at be some high performance bows in the game, at the very least.  For those who love to play archer this is a must.  All I'm saying is that based on the type of army you raise in the game I don't think it's fair to draw a comparison to the bow you're using.  You have some valid points about standardization and are very knowledgeable on the subject, though, more so than me as my knowledge is more classical and less medieval.  I'd be really fine with the npc bows sucking, even at like swadish sharp shooters or whatever, as they seem to do okay with them.  Arrows are mainly to soften up an army imo anyways.  I really would like a really expensive crossbow, or longbow even, that could tear things up, however, as there is historical precident and it would make the archer role a lot more fun.