Quivers/Arrowbags

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Zadok13

Recruit
I am not sure how accurate this is, but Bernard Cornwell in his book 'Harlequin' says that a quiver is a poor choice of arrow storage, and that a bag, I think attached to the leg, was more common for archers. My brother, who shoots bows in reality, seems to agree. I am unsure whether this will apply to mounted archers, however.
 
Zadok13 said:
I am not sure how accurate this is, but Bernard Cornwell in his book 'Harlequin' says that a quiver is a poor choice of arrow storage, and that a bag, I think attached to the leg, was more common for archers. My brother, who shoots bows in reality, seems to agree. I am unsure whether this will apply to mounted archers, however.
Click to expand...
If quiver is bad, what could be better?
 
A drawstring and cover to keep arrows from spilling out. A less bouncy place to keep your arrows when you run (they're hung at the hip). Sometimes a leather spacer to keep your fletchings from getting buggered up.


Only thing is, in *this* game, accurate archers are gods -to everyone but shield-men. I don't think I'd like giving archers a much higher arrow capacity.
 
What about making the "large bag" of arrows/bolts a bit bigger (and uncommon) but keeping the normal ones the same?
 
Meh, there is already a "large bag". As our neighborhood knight said, archers are already overpowered. If you really want to focus on archery, buy 2 large bags. :)
 
Nice book...

If I may reply to Destichado: I am a poor shot with a bow, game and character wise.

[I am a decent shot myself... but that doesn't matter, in-game, I guess! :) ]

But an accurate lone archer *could* rule over a mob of blundering raiders wearing just furry undergarments.
They don't even take cover; they just shamble forward with no regard for their own safety.
It's not bowmen being overrated. It's enemy AI in need of fine tuning.

Also, a "large" bag holding just 1 shot over the maximum seems like an oversight.
25% would make sense.
1/24 doesn't, to warrant a different object altogether.

Just my opinion here; I like to share ideas.

:)
 
That's true as far as it goes, but even if the AI were improved enough to permit something as complex as a phalanx or a flying wedge, accurate archers would still own. As long as the target can be hit, and as long as there's time to hit them, ranged units uber alles -thus far, anyway. I'd like to tweak the armour some to change that -in damage resistance AND price- but that's something that can be dealt with later. And has nothing to do with arrow bags. :P
 
I wasn't thinking of formations here.
I just noticed raiders/pirates [I haven't joined factions so I don't know about other troop types] rarely behave in a sensible way.

Only once did a raider archer climb up to an advantageous position.
But for the most part they just slog along, piecemeal, towards my general direction.

They don't seem to be trying anything fancy as retreating or flanking. They just let their scant few horsemen speed on [to be butchered by my infantry or by my lance], while footmen hobble about.


I haven't reached high level in archery - only about 120 with my hunter char. Not enough to be "uber", and entail the kind of scenario you were talking about.

Question is: why shouldn't ranged weapons own? Except for gameplay balance, that is...
If I may suggest it, I would change something in the way you play. Maybe you are too experienced, or found the ideal way to deploy/employ bows.

You could raise the battle size limit up a notch or two.
Or you might self-limit your chars to one quiver of arrows.


I'd like to reach the kind of experience [player/character wise] so as to properly judge your point.
Sadly my archer type got beaten once too many and fell back to my lancer/commander type.

If I had to complain about any weapon being uber, I think great lance is the closest thing to "point and kill".
But it's just me liking it over other weapons, and my char sporting well over 150 pts in it.
When I am fed up with it, I simply change over to other wpns, to spice things up.

I don't know how really unbalanced bowmen are, yet.
They don't seem like that to me. :)
 
Bowmen rule?

All the time I encounter them they seem to have problems deciding what to use. They're fine while you gallop towards them, then they draw a hand weapon. Shuffle backwards a few feet and draw bow, aim for five seconds then re-draw hand weapon without firing, advance, stop, re-draw bow. This goes on for ever. In fact, you could almost start a will he? won't he? sweepstake.
I second the large bag increase though. Even if they are more rare. An extra arrow just makes a mockery of the whole idea.
 
i think bows are enough but i don't understand how bows came back after war :D i think he collects them after war :)
 
Well actually, bowmen still used quivers, but "quiver" and "back quiver" are two very different things. The back quiver that people seem to associate with medieval bowmen was purely from hunters, and native americans. Military bowmen did in fact have a cloth quiver (although this was very often leather anyway) but an arrow bag is entirely different. An arrow bag is huge, and can hold a couple of hundred arrows easily, it was used for transportation, not for battle.
 
History-wise, archers also used arrow-rings to carry their "ammo".

English bowmen, reportedly, used to plant shafts in the soil, and array the arrows [er...] before them, for easier reach during battle.

I guess we must accept compromises about gameplay vs realism.

:)
 
I think the "large" bags of bolts/arrows should just be removed.

Realism aside, archers really are a bit too Godly in this game.





Then come Marnid and Borcha :x
 
Questor is right, English longbowmen, at the beginning of battle (when in formation) would place their arrows in the ground, so that the bacteria from the ground entered their target when they hit them. They didn't take the arrows out of the ground and place them in the bow though, they simply placed the bow on the arrow, nocking the arrow on the appropriate part of the string as the lowered the bow onto the arrow, then simply lifting, drawing then releasing. This method made longbowmen much, much faster than crossbowmen.

On another note, longbowmen made up a more effective army than crossbowmen because you can fit more longbowmen sideways than you can crossbowmen :D
 
Large, 8 piece, "bags" of javelins make some sense.
You begin with 8 instead of 7 missiles, and that's 1/7 more than your usual allotment.

What about *one* arrow?
1/24?
Large arrow/bolt bags might contain 27 [28?] shots instead of 24. It would be 1/7 more, and it would make more sense.

Just MHO. :)


Dunno how they chose quiver sizes.
Would be fun to know.


EDIT:

[:) @ Mokurei]
 
Mokurei said:
^_^ I reckon they just thought 24 was a really cool number. Don't you agree? :lol:
Click to expand...

I'd go for 25, 50, 75 and so on.
But I like fractions of 100.

Yet, counting things by the dozen is common too, so 24 would make as much sense.

:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Dev Reply
I pray for micro battle management
Replies
5
Views
839
Dejan
Dejan
  • Dev Reply
SP - Player, NPCs & Troops Promote Troops and upgrading them to Companion for richer role playing
Replies
12
Views
1K
Piconi
Piconi
Some annoyances and frustrations (battles and equipment)
Replies
1
Views
593
Allias
Back
Top Bottom