Ranged weapons. Worth investing?

[Blackfish]

So I lance with a bastard sword. Pretty effective, can be done even at low speeds, don't have to switch weapon when my horse stops (can directly start chopping in all directions), and when the thrusting attack is chambered, my shield actually covers me better than the small shields usable with lances (especially if the shield I'm using is of the (Nord) Round shield family).

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, are you saying that lances cannot be used with larger shields, and that you can lance with a bastard sword?

 

[Ludial]

So I lance with a bastard sword. Pretty effective, can be done even at low speeds, don't have to switch weapon when my horse stops (can directly start chopping in all directions), and when the thrusting attack is chambered, my shield actually covers me better than the small shields usable with lances (especially if the shield I'm using is of the (Nord) Round shield family).

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, are you saying that lances cannot be used with larger shields, and that you can lance with a bastard sword?

not exactly. when you're using a lance, most shields stay at your side when you couch. small round shields are raised to cover you somewhat better when you couch, but still leave one side and your hips open to projectiles.

However, when you chamber a thrusting attack with a sword, your shield is put right in front of your chest. With a bigger round shield you're pretty well covered. With a sword you can effectively 'lance' people immediately around you, while also leaving you able to counter-attack well in close quarters. This can be called a bump-stake technique similarly to bump-slash. It's easier to hit people with it since they're right in front of you and is often deadlier since it's a piercing attack and not a cutting one. Shield covers you well, again, so it's about as deadly as actually lancing while being easier to pull off.

 

[Stepsongrapes]

However, when you chamber a thrusting attack with a sword, your shield is put right in front of your chest. With a bigger round shield you're pretty well covered. With a sword you can effectively 'lance' people immediately around you, while also leaving you able to counter-attack well in close quarters. This can be called a bump-stake technique similarly to bump-slash. It's easier to hit people with it since they're right in front of you and is often deadlier since it's a piercing attack and not a cutting one. Shield covers you well, again, so it's about as deadly as actually lancing while being easier to pull off.

I think you're confusing people by calling this "lancing".  Other than the fact that it is a pierce attack from a horse, it has very little to do with lancing.  Rather, it has its own set of pros/cons compared to true lancing.

 

[Argeus the Paladin]

I'd just go ahead and call it "thrusting".

 

[Sellus_Gravius]

If you are an archer-type player then heck yeah. If not, then don't.

 

[winsis]

Ranged weapons are extremely useful in almost every type of battle. Try taking out horse archer with a melee weapon. Not that easy, and your shield is going to break eventually, and even if its an amazing shield like a huscarls shield, there still going to be more than one circling you. And your troops wont fair better if they dont have ranged weapons, they are going to get wrecked.

The only time a ranged weapon should not be used is when they all have shield. Like the free company's, Huscarls, and more.

 

[Thundertrod]

Has a leader ship character, I normly don't have the sates to engage in melee, the drunk in the bar beets me nearly every time.
But a bolt to the face from my hunting crossbow. can take dowen any thing and it needs no skill points.

 

[Ludial]

Has a leader ship character, I normly don't have the sates to engage in melee, the drunk in the bar beets me nearly every time.
But a bolt to the face from my hunting crossbow. can take dowen any thing and it needs no skill points.

hm, even with my leader char I take out the drunk every time. You just need something long and quick, like a spear or quarterstaff (excellent personal defense weapons  )

so yeah, crossbow for chars that don't need or want to put points into combat skills (or commanders, as we know them), bow for fast killing machines and thrown for shieldmen on foot. not much else left to say.

 

[Aleolex]

Yes it is. I was lucky enough to find a masterwork light crossbow and siege crossbow, and The light crossbow has saved me from a lot of frustrating horse chases, and the siege crossbow, a lot of frustrating sieges. Ranged weapons can definitely give you an edge that your regular melee weapon doesn't give, and crossbows are especially useful because then you can put the points you'd normally use for power draw into other things. And at high proficiencies are extremely accurate.

Just go with what works for you. if you don't like range, than melee is definitely still there.

 

[Zemalf]

I stayed away from archery and throwing for a long time, since I just liked to lance. But then I wanted to try horse archery and been loving it since. It's not easy mode like lancing is at times, and hitting a head shot from full gallop is quite satisfying The downside of archery is that it takes two slots from the weapons (so no sword, shield and lance to go with'em).

Throwing only takes one, but as others said above, you get a lot less ammo and the range is not as good. (but if you pack sword, shield and lance, and those are your "main" weapons, I'd add throwing there for versatility.

 

[Captain_Octavius]

The other (bigger) downside of horse archery is that you need to invest quite a lot of skill points. 4 Power Draw and 4 Horse Archery is kinda the minimum to hit anything. It costs you 10 skill points to be good enough at it, more if you want to shine at it.

I played a HA a lot in the original M&B, but don't do so in Warband. With your own kingdom the party and leader skills have become more important so I rather stick to crossbows, plus throwing weapons are better and more often used than back then. Since I play on full damage, I prefer to have a shield at all times on horse back. I fear all the axes and javelins in my face if I'd play a HA in Warband.

 

[Winterwolf00]

I personally prefer using a siege crossbow on foot and then joining my infantry for the charge.

 

[VikingHaag]

I personally prefer using a siege crossbow on foot and then joining my infantry for the charge.

Why spend time shooting stuff, i just charge and take out the leader with couched lance. The i go back, and charge on foot with my 120 troops. I feel much more safer in a killing zone with 40 huscarls of mine then alone some 40 yards back. In the back if a knight shows up i'm done.

 

[Ludial]

getting the leader with a lance risks getting a bolt right in your face.

Pretty much everyone here said that even if you're not big on ranged, bringing a crossbow at least to sieges is a good idea. this way you can do something to diminish the ranged threat to your own soldiers while waiting for the thrice-accursed belfry to reach the walls.

You don't fight sieges much, do you? If you did you would've noticed that ranged weapons are much more important there, since unlike in the field you have nowhere to run but have plenty of cover.

 

[Fattyfat]

Yep, bring a ranged weapon to a siege every time.  You'll make the enemy cry.

You can always fill up your slots like this - Xbow/Bow - Ammo - Ammo - Ammo, and then just pick up whatever weapon and/or shield you like from the casualties.

 

[VikingHaag]

getting the leader with a lance risks getting a bolt right in your face.

Pretty much everyone here said that even if you're not big on ranged, bringing a crossbow at least to sieges is a good idea. this way you can do something to diminish the ranged threat to your own soldiers while waiting for the thrice-accursed belfry to reach the walls.

You don't fight sieges much, do you? If you did you would've noticed that ranged weapons are much more important there, since unlike in the field you have nowhere to run but have plenty of cover.

I fight a lot of sieges. I marshalled the conquest of all the former Vaegir lands. And anyway, i have always 70+ elite archers on my side. I i'm low on health i pull out my board shield and cover myself and the best archer i find (if attacking). If i'm defending, well, i will give xbows a try, but i have only 36 proficiency, i'll do much more damage to the enemy if i block the ladder with 3 board shields and occcasionally kill some1 with my 1 hander ( 420+ proficiency).

 

[Ludial]

getting the leader with a lance risks getting a bolt right in your face.

Pretty much everyone here said that even if you're not big on ranged, bringing a crossbow at least to sieges is a good idea. this way you can do something to diminish the ranged threat to your own soldiers while waiting for the thrice-accursed belfry to reach the walls.

You don't fight sieges much, do you? If you did you would've noticed that ranged weapons are much more important there, since unlike in the field you have nowhere to run but have plenty of cover.

I fight a lot of sieges. I marshalled the conquest of all the former Vaegir lands. And anyway, i have always 70+ elite archers on my side. I i'm low on health i pull out my board shield and cover myself and the best archer i find (if attacking). If i'm defending, well, i will give xbows a try, but i have only 36 proficiency, i'll do much more damage to the enemy if i block the ladder with 3 board shields and occcasionally kill some1 with my 1 hander ( 420+ proficiency).

ok, so your current char specializes in turtling and you use others' archers. so why the thread in the first place?

 

[VikingHaag]

getting the leader with a lance risks getting a bolt right in your face.

Pretty much everyone here said that even if you're not big on ranged, bringing a crossbow at least to sieges is a good idea. this way you can do something to diminish the ranged threat to your own soldiers while waiting for the thrice-accursed belfry to reach the walls.

You don't fight sieges much, do you? If you did you would've noticed that ranged weapons are much more important there, since unlike in the field you have nowhere to run but have plenty of cover.

I fight a lot of sieges. I marshalled the conquest of all the former Vaegir lands. And anyway, i have always 70+ elite archers on my side. I i'm low on health i pull out my board shield and cover myself and the best archer i find (if attacking). If i'm defending, well, i will give xbows a try, but i have only 36 proficiency, i'll do much more damage to the enemy if i block the ladder with 3 board shields and occcasionally kill some1 with my 1 hander ( 420+ proficiency).

ok, so your current char specializes in turtling and you use others' archers. so why the thread in the first place?

I don't have a life. And i wanted your opinion since i want to start all over again.

 

[Ludial]

so if you want to start again, just make a char that's strong at range and see for yourself. you don't need to keep telling us that ranged weapons are useless in a thread that asks if ranged weapons can be useful.

 

[Lord Brutus]

so if you want to start again, just make a char that's strong at range and see for yourself. you don't need to keep telling us that ranged weapons are useless in a thread that asks if ranged weapons can be useful.

Although it pains me slightly, only slightly, to agree with Ludial, I must in this case.   Though if you don't want to invest points in archery, use crossbows.