Ranged weapons. Worth investing?

[Felonious]

It seems that you're dead-set on remaining a turtle, every point we make you rebut with "but my turtle can do this better than it can do that!".

Why don't you just try bringing a crossbow to a siege defense, load up with a Siege Crossbow and 2 sets of steel bolts, as well as your preferred  2h/Polearm (I'd recommended either a maul/sledgehammer/morningstar, balanced iron staff or a balanced glaive for siege defense).

To start off I'd recommend just firing down upon the massive crowds struggling to get up the ladder, in a large siege you'll probably get around 70 proficiency points just from doing this, and you'll kill MUCH more than you would as a turtle standing at the breach.

Just remember to bring along some crossbowmen, so that you can scavenge their bolts when they die.

 

[Winterwolf00]

It seems that you're dead-set on remaining a turtle, every point we make you rebut with "but my turtle can do this better than it can do that!".

Why don't you just try bringing a crossbow to a siege defense, load up with a Siege Crossbow and 2 sets of steel bolts, as well as your preferred  2h/Polearm (I'd recommended either a maul/sledgehammer/morningstar, balanced iron staff or a balanced glaive for siege defense).

To start off I'd recommend just firing down upon the massive crowds struggling to get up the ladder, in a large siege you'll probably get around 70 proficiency points just from doing this, and you'll kill MUCH more than you would as a turtle standing at the breach.

Just remember to bring along some crossbowmen, so that you can scavenge their bolts when they die.

I like to mix rhodockian style crossbows with nordic axe, shield, and armor.

 

[Ludial]

actually, the cool thing about ranged weapons in Warband in general is that you can pick up used ammo. It does disappear after a while, but if you hurry, you can fill your quiver at least once during a single assault. Using whatever ranged weapon your enemy is using can be a bit hard on you in terms of skill points, but it would certainly be fun for a warrior char. You don't even have to rely on your guys dieing to get their ammo (which I personally find to be the biggest bull**** ever). You can just pick up the enemy's ammunition and throw it back at them 

 

[Sellus_Gravius]

I personally like the short bows in the game rather than the longbows and warbows. And let's not start on crossbows. Hate em!

 

[Winterwolf00]

I personally like the short bows in the game rather than the longbows and warbows. And let's not start on crossbows. Hate em!

But there so much more powerful.  And Accurate.

 

[Sellus_Gravius]

Yes they are more powerful. But the reload time leaves you SO VULNERABLE. Sorry, just hate em!

 

[Stepsongrapes]

I personally like the short bows in the game rather than the longbows and warbows. And let's not start on crossbows. Hate em!

But there so much more powerful.  And Accurate.

DPS on a warbow or longbow with a good power draw skill is several times greater than the best crossbow, with proficiencies at the same level.  It just takes a significant skill point investment.  Accuracy is the same or better, too.

 

[candyman]

Its like this

A cross bow with 58p and a bag of steel bolts (+2dmg) will do maximum 60 damage every time, no matter what your proficiency, and takes 3-4 seconds to reload

A hunting bow may only do 10 dmg every 5-6 seconds if you have say 30 proficiency and 0 in power draw, so yes, assuming you're not putting any points into it at all, crossbows are always better

By comparison, with a MW strong bow and a bag of bodkins, and 10 PD + 400 proficiency, I can easily put out 70-80 dmg per shot, every second, meaning I'm killing people with every shot fired, at a rate that a crossbow can't compete

Pretty sure people have said this before, and I just made up the numbers for Xbows, but you get the general idea

 

[Ludial]

Yes they are more powerful. But the reload time leaves you SO VULNERABLE. Sorry, just hate em!

that's what I thought too before I started playing commander chars (investing my skill points in my army rather than my own individual deadliness). While not particularly great in the field, these things are actually better than bows in sieges and require nothing more than to pick them up and use them (whereas 10 PD means sinking a truckload of points both stat and skill wise). Part of what makes them so great in sieges is that bending over to reload them hides you in cover without necessarily having to move away. Bows leave you open all the time.

Like I already mentioned several times in this thread:
crossbows for commanders (aka 'classical medieval merc captains'), bows for terminators (aka horse archers), thrown for Conan-type chars that fight in messy melees and prefer to be covered by their shields all of the time.

 

[Stepsongrapes]

Yes they are more powerful. But the reload time leaves you SO VULNERABLE. Sorry, just hate em!

that's what I thought too before I started playing commander chars (investing my skill points in my army rather than my own individual deadliness). While not particularly great in the field, these things are actually better than bows in sieges and require nothing more than to pick them up and use them (whereas 10 PD means sinking a truckload of points both stat and skill wise). Part of what makes them so great in sieges is that bending over to reload them hides you in cover without necessarily having to move away. Bows leave you open all the time.

The downside of bows are the skill/stat costs. 

However, if you put those in, crossbows are absolutely NOT better in sieges in effectiveness.  It's better to be killing their archers than trying to spin the bend-over-time as a benefit.  Heck, take it to the extreme: raising up a shield is better than bows or crossbows!  Full cover 100% of the time!  Why not?  Because you're not doing any killing in that time (behind a shield or bending over). 

Bows leave you open for the time you're killing.  Crossbows leave you open for the time their killing.  On top of that, crossbows have a less-in-the-open period while their reloading and not killing.  Bows just have one mode: killing.

 

[Dalkar]

I've lost count of the times I've missed a pesky Rhodok because he bent over. and my shot that would of cleanly sliced off part of his skull whips over his back. Bastards.

 

[JosieJ]

I only ever use ranged weapons in sieges, but I find them invaluable there.

It rather fits my playstyle (slow, slow, slow) to invest points only in the weapons I don't use all the time, as the weapons I do use tend to level up just from continuous use.  So, since I use a bastard sword, lance, and sometimes a shield in field battles--and in the beginning of the game I'm fighting mostly field battles--my one-handed, two-handed and polearm level up just fine on their own.  Then I put points into bow, crossbow and throwing: in the early game, I also participate in tournaments quite often and those proficiencies help in Sarranid, Khergit or other ranged weapons-heavy tourneys.  It also helps to have a bow or crossbow for some of those "attack the bandit lair" quests, where you're forced to fight on foot.

Since I play so slowly (really, it can take me 8 or 9 in-game months to get my party to the size I want it and to build up enough of an economic base), by the time I get to the point of the game where I'm fighting a lot of sieges, I'm more than leveled-up enough in ranged weapons to be brutally effective.

 

[Ludial]

The downside of bows are the skill/stat costs. 

However, if you put those in, crossbows are absolutely NOT better in sieges in effectiveness.  It's better to be killing their archers than trying to spin the bend-over-time as a benefit.  Heck, take it to the extreme: raising up a shield is better than bows or crossbows!  Full cover 100% of the time!  Why not?  Because you're not doing any killing in that time (behind a shield or bending over). 

Bows leave you open for the time you're killing.  Crossbows leave you open for the time their killing.  On top of that, crossbows have a less-in-the-open period while their reloading and not killing.  Bows just have one mode: killing.

well, the thing about bows is that they're not exactly good for protracted fighting. Yes, they do leave you open while you're killing (s'why they're my favorite ranged weapon in this game, duh ), and they're just awesomely aggressive (as in the way an archer fights). Problem with their speed is they run out of ammo really fast. Add to that the fact they do leave you open all the time and, well, they require a somewhat different playstyle. Namely, one which relies on mobility. Because the cool thing about a bow is that you can shoot it on the move pretty much, and shoot really fast. So for people who like to move and fight aggressively, the bow is the perfect weapon in M&B. But for those that prefer to slug it out in pitched battle or siege (where the length of the battle is usually longer and fighters are typically well armored, slow and expected to show more discipline than sheer aggression), a weapon that has a lower APS (ammo-per-second) quotient and that allows you to use cover more effectively is certainly preferable.

And it comes down to something I've kept repeating through this whole thread - it all comes down to the playstyle. You want to be fast, aggressive and elusive? Go for bow. You want to be precise, tactful and care more about organization and discipline than aggression? Go for crossbow. You're an honorable warrior who makes love to his shield and never goes anywhere without it? Go for thrown. that's it.

Oh, and the last part about thrown includes one class I've forgotten so far - assault cavalry. Back in the days, pretty much all assault cavalry except central and western Europeans brought ranged weapons to combat. They did have that much sense. From Persian cataphracts through Rus drujina cavalry to mamluqs. Usually those ranged weapons were bows and javelins. It's simply that a fast to shoot and hard hitting ranged weapon is perfect for an assault.

So yeah, javs/axes for foot and horse shieldmen. Outfit for both can be the same: polearm, hand weapon, shield and throwing weapon. That's how it was, and for a reason.

 

[Stepsongrapes]

well, the thing about bows is that they're not exactly good for protracted fighting.

I still think your logic is flawed. 

Assuming that the steep skill/stat investment has been made, a good bow does roughly the same damage, shot for shot as the best crossbow. 

If a bow runs out of ammo faster, that means one thing: you just dealt out the same damage/kills as the crossbow, in a lot less time.  There is NO downside to that.  There is no benefit in being forced to slow your rate of fire (something a bow user can always voluntarily do). 

You keep repeatedly mentioning that a bow leaves you vulnerable.  A crossbow leaves you no less vulnerable, during the shooting period.  The fact that it has an enforced bend-over period is not a benefit.  Rather, the benefit is on the other side: the bow leaves you always vulnerable because you are always shooting, something the crossbow cannot do.

Basically, the game is well-balanced: an upper-end bow is superior to an upper-end crossbow, period.  However, it has a steep stat/skill cost enforced by the game for this superiority.

 

[Ludial]

well, the thing about bows is that they're not exactly good for protracted fighting.

I still think your logic is flawed. 

why don't you tell that to the devs who made it so that NPC archers run out of ammo faster? or hell, tell it to the Universe that made it so bows are faster than crossbows

you seem to miss a lot of what I say:
1. the bow is my favorite ranged weapon in the game. period. it's fast, it's deadly, I can shoot stuff on the move, I can kill things really fast with it.
2. however, for chars that consider the deadliness of their army more important than their own individual deadliness, the bow is not a good choice because of the investment required.
3. hence, as I keep repeating throughout this whole damn thread, the ranged weapon of a certain char has to be selected based on that char's specialization. if it's sheer DPS, go for bow. if it's command, just take a crossbow and put those skill points somewhere else. if you love your shield too much, take a thrown weapon.

really, mate, mebbe you should eat some chocolate icecream and go hug your girlfriend instead of wasting your time here arguing about something that everyone else has already confirmed.

 

[Stepsongrapes]

Ludial,

I think your problem is you're a imprecise/poor writer.  Your words don't express what you mean.  Alternatively, your logic is just flawed.

Your statements:

1) "these things [crossbows] are actually better than bows in sieges"- wrong.  I've already provided my reasons why I think this is wrong.

2) "well, the thing about bows is that they're not exactly good for protracted fighting" - also wrong.  The only reason why NPC archers can be a bit of a pain is that they start lobbing shots too early (an AI issue).  An NPC crossbowman is no less wasteful in terms of the AI, it's just saved by the enforced reload time that prevents too much waste.  A player (well, a non-wasteful player) does not face this issue which is rooted in AI, not the characteristics of the weapons.  Micro-manage NPC archers a bit with hold fire commands.

Saying crossbows are better for commanders is simply a restatement that they take less investment.  I don't disagree, at all.

But your statements on crossbows versus bows on a head-to-head comparison are wrong.  The only substantial difference between the two at the upper end are: 1) rate of fire and 2) the trajectory arc being greater for the crossbow, and 3) arrow bags are bigger.  #1 and #3 clearly favor the bow.  #2 is interesting because it can make it slightly easier to shoot over shields/get a headshot.  However, I think it makes long-range shooting much tougher. 

The discussion would be completely different if upper-end bows did less damage per shot than crossbows, but that is not the case.

Feel free to keep getting personally offended when people disagree with you.  I don't mind, we're discussing a game after all.

 

[candyman]

Won't somebody think of the children???

 

[Winterwolf00]

Won't somebody think of the children???

The children say crossbow is better. 

 

[Ludial]

Ludial,

I think your problem is you're a imprecise/poor writer.  Your words don't express what you mean.  Alternatively, your logic is just flawed.

and no, I don't get offended. you just don't understand things and blame it on others' logic being 'flawed'.

why don't you think about why in the heavens crossbows and the extremely inaccurate and slow early firearms came to completely supplant bows as ranged weapons of war in history, eh? when you answer yourself that question you might just realize that there is no ultimate weapon type. Hell, I don't even like bows as such. I'd much rather have a sling/staff-sling, but those aren't available in the game. So the next best thing for sheer versatility and damage is bows, at least when you put in the skill points.

 

[Dalkar]

If you have a Pavise shield you can just turn around when you reload, so any arrows/bolts/knives/insertpointyobjecthere hit your shield on your back. Although that doesn't protect your backside.