Crossbows too weak?

Users who are viewing this thread

Mantel

Recruit
Before we start: lets make a few things clear:
-Battanian Fian Champions are currently unmatched if it comes to ranged units
-Arrows have more Ammo then Bolts
-Bows shoot faster then Crossbows
-Bows have higher range then Crossbows.

Now lets think: why did humanity even invent the crossbows?

1.: its easy to use of course. while archers needed lots of training, a crossbow could be used by anyone who is strong enough to load it. (there were loading mechanisms too)
2.: and more important: their armor piercing! i cant stress this out enough. as far as i can tell, there is NO armor penetration in the game right now. i tested it with several crossbows and i ALWAYS was dealing more dmg with the bow. (tried both with high [400+] skill). so the only reason right now you could use crossbows are the pavese shields. but there is no command to tell the troops to place them (yes, shocking information: pavese shields have this weird shape because they are placeable shields to give ranged units cover).

i think they really should implement armor penetration for the crossbow and maces. i think 50% for the crossbow and 25% for the maces, but thats balance talking and we all know there is never an end to balancing a game.
 
Armor and easy for newcome to use crossbow, while Archery had to be train lot, I think bowmen taken longer to train to upgrade while crossbow is easy to level up, and crossbow ability to better chance vs armor, that's why crossbow should be in game for quick level up and had power, it's easy to use for newcome, while archery are not easy to train but very deadly much more than crossbow in hand of master.
 
Is there any actual evidence that crossbows were better against armor than warbows? I think this might be merely a misconception. Crossbows weren't used because they were powerful, but because they could be put in the hands of masses of untrained peasants and still be usable, much unlike warbows.
So instead of making crossbows stronger across the board, I would say that they should simply be made more useful in the hands of low level units, while bows would be nerfed for those. But in the hands of elites, bows should still prevail. (like the Fian champions you mentioned)

To put it simply: nerf low level archers and their bows, slightly buff low level crossbowmen.
 
There is armor penetration, it's based on the damage type. Bows and crossbows have the same.

Comparing units it's difficult because they have different equipment. There's simply no equivalent to Fian Champions. Crossbowmen also carry an useless shield which slows them down.

As for players though, they do more damage per hit, are more accurate and have better range with a crossbow than with a bow (just compare the best bow with the best crossbow). But these advantages matter less at high level, while the rate of fire still does.
 
Before we start: lets make a few things clear:
-Battanian Fian Champions are currently unmatched if it comes to ranged units
-Arrows have more Ammo then Bolts
-Bows shoot faster then Crossbows
-Bows have higher range then Crossbows.

Now lets think: why did humanity even invent the crossbows?

1.: its easy to use of course. while archers needed lots of training, a crossbow could be used by anyone who is strong enough to load it. (there were loading mechanisms too)
2.: and more important: their armor piercing! i cant stress this out enough. as far as i can tell, there is NO armor penetration in the game right now. i tested it with several crossbows and i ALWAYS was dealing more dmg with the bow. (tried both with high [400+] skill). so the only reason right now you could use crossbows are the pavese shields. but there is no command to tell the troops to place them (yes, shocking information: pavese shields have this weird shape because they are placeable shields to give ranged units cover).

i think they really should implement armor penetration for the crossbow and maces. i think 50% for the crossbow and 25% for the maces, but thats balance talking and we all know there is never an end to balancing a game.

Right now crossbow destroy shield faster then bows. They are great against shielded infantry.
 
I have fought red crossbowmen and green bowmen - and I could assure you that crossbows hits way harder in close-quarter, you have to be really cautious when charging into a group of crossbowmen even heavily armored
 
Is there any actual evidence that crossbows were better against armor than warbows? I think this might be merely a misconception. Crossbows weren't used because they were powerful, but because they could be put in the hands of masses of untrained peasants and still be usable, much unlike warbows.
So instead of making crossbows stronger across the board, I would say that they should simply be made more useful in the hands of low level units, while bows would be nerfed for those. But in the hands of elites, bows should still prevail. (like the Fian champions you mentioned)

To put it simply: nerf low level archers and their bows, slightly buff low level crossbowmen.

yes crossbows were more powerfull and its even pretty easy to understand (iam archer in reallife^^). while you might be able to draw a bow thats above your "powerlevel", you cant aim it accurately. thats why you never use bows that force you to go all out with your muscles. its hard, yes, but if you shake, its too strong. a normal crossbow only has to be pulled once and then its done while there even were and are heavy crossbows with a crank because humans were not strong enough to pull them by hand. this whole power gets put into a projectile that way way more heavy then the average arrow. so not only the power of the crossbow limbs adds to the higher penetration, it also is the weight and with that the force of the projectile.
if we would go straight into realism, bows would deal basicly no damage versus armor. have you ever seen a warbow shot at a metal armor? there is only a small dent. no hole, no wound. the person wearing the armor would be completely unharmed (except for chainmails. he could get blue marks, but no serious wounds)


the thing is: crossbows DO deal less damage in bannerlord then bows. no matter the skill level.my bow was dealing over 90 dmg to heavy armored cataphracts while the crossbow with same skill level only dealed 60. thats completely against all realism^^ a bow should deal against heavy armored units not more then 50 dmg (thats still not realistic, but its a game and games should make fun), while the crossbow should deal the 90 dmg.
the bonus shield dmg also isnt necessary, since shields are invented to protect against projectiles. thats why axes are there and you dont win wars only with ranged units^^ (i know, in bannerlord you do, but i talk about history^^)
 
The problem is bows are too devastating on the top end. They need to tune bows down, not tune crossbows up.

and part of the reason I say that is you also have factions like Aserai who take too long to get access to Archers, and seeing as they are a light armor faction, is not very balanced as of now.
 
Last edited:
yes crossbows were more powerfull and its even pretty easy to understand (iam archer in reallife^^). while you might be able to draw a bow thats above your "powerlevel", you cant aim it accurately. thats why you never use bows that force you to go all out with your muscles. its hard, yes, but if you shake, its too strong. a normal crossbow only has to be pulled once and then its done while there even were and are heavy crossbows with a crank because humans were not strong enough to pull them by hand. this whole power gets put into a projectile that way way more heavy then the average arrow. so not only the power of the crossbow limbs adds to the higher penetration, it also is the weight and with that the force of the projectile.
if we would go straight into realism, bows would deal basicly no damage versus armor. have you ever seen a warbow shot at a metal armor? there is only a small dent. no hole, no wound. the person wearing the armor would be completely unharmed (except for chainmails. he could get blue marks, but no serious wounds)


the thing is: crossbows DO deal less damage in bannerlord then bows. no matter the skill level.my bow was dealing over 90 dmg to heavy armored cataphracts while the crossbow with same skill level only dealed 60. thats completely against all realism^^ a bow should deal against heavy armored units not more then 50 dmg (thats still not realistic, but its a game and games should make fun), while the crossbow should deal the 90 dmg.
the bonus shield dmg also isnt necessary, since shields are invented to protect against projectiles. thats why axes are there and you dont win wars only with ranged units^^ (i know, in bannerlord you do, but i talk about history^^)

All bolts are set to blunt that's why they deal less DMG. But they still destroy shields faster than bows.
 
The problem is bows are too devastating on the top end. They need to tune bows down, not tune crossbows up.

and part of the reason I say that is you also have factions like Aserai who take too long to get access to Archers, and seeing as they are a light armor faction, is not very balanced as of now.
as far as i understand the aserai, they are a strong cavalry folk, but maibe i just mixed them up with the desert folk out of warband ^^

The problem is bows are too devastating on the top end. They need to tune bows down, not tune crossbows up.

and part of the reason I say that is you also have factions like Aserai who take too long to get access to Archers, and seeing as they are a light armor faction, is not very balanced as of now.

yes, i think bows have to be nerfed quite a bit. but crossbows? idk, i think i should test the crossbow units before i can really talk about that, i tested the crossbow in my own hands and was very disappointed.
 
Well, bows need to be less accurate. We have a smaller targeting reticule for crossbows, but both weapons rarely venture out of the center. You shoot a bow VERY reliably with no skill points, and that needs to shift to where with 100 or so is where you’re at where we currently start.

Its hard to showcase the value of the xbow mean bows have overturned accuracy
 
the real answer is easy all bolts atm have 0 pierce damage while arrows are in the range of 0-4 pierce damage
basically the devs arent dont with crossbows and there will be something in the future for them as it is clear crossbows are meant to be stronger that what they really are right now
 
yes crossbows were more powerfull and its even pretty easy to understand (iam archer in reallife^^). while you might be able to draw a bow thats above your "powerlevel", you cant aim it accurately. thats why you never use bows that force you to go all out with your muscles. its hard, yes, but if you shake, its too strong. a normal crossbow only has to be pulled once and then its done while there even were and are heavy crossbows with a crank because humans were not strong enough to pull them by hand. this whole power gets put into a projectile that way way more heavy then the average arrow. so not only the power of the crossbow limbs adds to the higher penetration, it also is the weight and with that the force of the projectile.
if we would go straight into realism, bows would deal basicly no damage versus armor. have you ever seen a warbow shot at a metal armor? there is only a small dent. no hole, no wound. the person wearing the armor would be completely unharmed (except for chainmails. he could get blue marks, but no serious wounds)


the thing is: crossbows DO deal less damage in bannerlord then bows. no matter the skill level.my bow was dealing over 90 dmg to heavy armored cataphracts while the crossbow with same skill level only dealed 60. thats completely against all realism^^ a bow should deal against heavy armored units not more then 50 dmg (thats still not realistic, but its a game and games should make fun), while the crossbow should deal the 90 dmg.
the bonus shield dmg also isnt necessary, since shields are invented to protect against projectiles. thats why axes are there and you dont win wars only with ranged units^^ (i know, in bannerlord you do, but i talk about history^^)
For an archer irl you seem to not know of a crucial difference between bows and crossbows, namely the draw length. You're completely wrong in thinking that all of the energy stored in the crossbow gets transferred into the bolt. In fact, most of that energy gets completely wasted, because the bolt does not have enough time in the crossbow to get accelerated as much as possible. The string does not press on it for long enough. This is precisely why crossbows have to have much higher draw weight than bows, because they're far less efficient in accelerating the projectile.
Also, this game does not have solid plate armor, only chainmail, scale and lamellar armor, all of which can be defeated by a heavy warbow. A heavy warbow goes through regular mail like hot knife through butter. Not to mention the fact that against solild plate armor crossbows are just as impotent. A good quality tempered steel plate breastplate is completely impervious to both longbows and crossbows. But, again, that's not relevant to this game, because there's no such armor here.
 
Occasionally "Light Crossbow" drops but very rarely. Still leveling it is a pain you basically have to charge enemies and shoot them point blank otherwise you don't hit anything :smile:
 
Just for the cool factor I'd love to mod crossbows to pierce their targets to offset their slow rate of fire.

Realistic? Nope.
Fun? Yep.
 
how come nobody sees the elefant in the room? Missile speeds of bows are usually very high, in meters per second compared to IRL.

Looters hit you while you run away with some 40 m/s velocity.

I managed at least 105 m/s (or 115) with noble bow and horse.

hickory crossbow also manages some 80 m/s.

Crossbows that destroyed warbows ? Siege defense crossbows, not something you would want to march with on you. Those were heavy, while their poundage wasnt necessarily higer. Bigger composite bow instead of steel, probably for more flexing, bolts also way heavier.

There were some big crossbows but not composite and they werent all that great. For some reason these crossbows are often omitted from discussions. However, when you have the same poundage and have the crossbow transported for you
 
For an archer irl you seem to not know of a crucial difference between bows and crossbows, namely the draw length. You're completely wrong in thinking that all of the energy stored in the crossbow gets transferred into the bolt. In fact, most of that energy gets completely wasted, because the bolt does not have enough time in the crossbow to get accelerated as much as possible. The string does not press on it for long enough. This is precisely why crossbows have to have much higher draw weight than bows, because they're far less efficient in accelerating the projectile.
Also, this game does not have solid plate armor, only chainmail, scale and lamellar armor, all of which can be defeated by a heavy warbow. A heavy warbow goes through regular mail like hot knife through butter. Not to mention the fact that against solild plate armor crossbows are just as impotent. A good quality tempered steel plate breastplate is completely impervious to both longbows and crossbows. But, again, that's not relevant to this game, because there's no such armor here.

Agreed. Someone with reason to know his business in this regard once told me that a crossbow with a 250lb draw weight is equivalent to about 70lbs in general longbow terms, so you're actually getting less than a third of the energy stored as draw weight put to any use. All of the crossbows in the game would be pants for armour-penetration purposes (and many of the bows too, to be fair).

So far my principal issue with archery in the game is that it's way too easy to hit the same place twice because you can simply leave the cursor static while you nock an arrow and repeatedly bullseye fortress defenders as a result. It also seems like there isn't enough projectile drop making it pretty easy to hit people at long rages.

Fortunately this is all pretty easy stuff to tweak as patches progress.
 
Back
Top Bottom