Shouldered Crossbow Upside down ?

[svart]

I've noticed something odd while checking out the new version today ...
The Crossbow on the back has the handle facing down, which seems odd to me and would probably be harder to pull up.

I find a parallel when being in the army, the gun handle being up and the barrel facing down ... wearing it upside down would earn a soldier a lot of mocking and raised eyebrows from the officers

The image below shows better what I mean, let me know what you think

 

[Heliopios]

What game is that picture on the right from?

 

[svart]

Gothic 2, was too lazy to find other ones ...

It seems that arms were carried handle down when strapped to one shoulder and held in the same hand - It's all about getting the logical convenience ... though this kind of shouldering seems useless when travelling - and m&b uses cross shouldering for the crossbows ...

 

[Sir Kiwi]

it is rigt the crusaders that had the crossbow used handle up so it is quicker to get to and then use.

 

[Sordid Sinister]

I dunno, looking at the picture I'd say you just grab the strap that's holding it on your back in your left hand and pull it over your head, making the handle slide smoothly into your right hand.

 

[Chilly5]

Well considering that all weapon-grab animations are moving your right hand up to your right shoulder and down, I suppose your suggestion makes a lot of sense. But hopefully they will still add new weapon-grab animations that might fix it, but I like your idea.

 

[Sir Saladin]

Keeping a big heavy machine strapped to your back is unreal whichever direction it is pointing so both depictions are wrong, there is no gunslinger crossbowman because you can't load it and walk around with it for hours at a time without ruining it or accidentally killing yourself. I would just carry it over my shoulder like a piece of lumber with the bow part behind the back of my head. If there ever was a sheath or harness for it it would have been unbearable for practical use because is is too big and cumbersome for that. I think it is fun seeing my character dressed up  in weapons like Rambo so I don't mind the unrealism.

 

[Merentha]

While it wouldn't be kept loaded, I don't see how its different from having a rifle or M-60 on your back.

 

[Sir Saladin]

It is different because the modern army machine rifle gun is lighter, and just isn't so darn clumsy to carry around. Carry a cello on your back for five miles.

 

[svart]

Keeping a big heavy machine strapped to your back is unreal whichever direction it is pointing so both depictions are wrong, there is no gunslinger crossbowman because you can't load it and walk around with it for hours at a time without ruining it or accidentally killing yourself. I would just carry it over my shoulder like a piece of lumber with the bow part behind the back of my head. If there ever was a sheath or harness for it it would have been unbearable for practical use because is is too big and cumbersome for that.

Well, the weight depends on what kind of crossbow it is - but I'm sure a heavy machinegun is a bit far in comparison (in my base, you needed two people to move the HMG), maybe a light machinegun.
And like a light machinegun, you wouldn't carry it over long distances ye (unless you really annoyed the captain  ), but I assumee the sheathes in M&B are for battles and not for the traveling. (in which they would probably be carried by horses and donkeys, and like you said over the shoulder like a piece of log)

So basically 99% of the time the crossbow would be carried just like you said, but I'd assume in battles this cross backstrap isn't that far fetched

I think it is fun seeing my character dressed up in weapons like Rambo so I don't mind the unrealism.

Ah good you said that, I was fearing another one of those e-historians would stick to this thread like a bloodsucker
And in that context, would look even cooler with the crossbow reverted like gothic

 

[Worbah]

I find a parallel when being in the army, the gun handle being up and the barrel facing down ... wearing it upside down would earn a soldier a lot of mocking and raised eyebrows from the officers

It's quicker to get an assault rifle when the barrel is facing down, but if you get on one knee the muzzle could get ****ty, or here during the winter, filled with snow.

 

[Kissaki]

It is different because the modern army machine rifle gun is lighter, and just isn't so darn clumsy to carry around. Carry a cello on your back for five miles.

The weight of a G-3 is between 4-5 kg, which I dare say is heavier than most crossbows. The weight did not present a problem in the least. Certainly nothing next to the bulk of gear the army man must carry today, which can be anywhere between 30-70 kg.

But the crossbow does have an awkward shape for carrying on the back, though. If I had to, however, I would probably carry it facing up, thereby minimizing the risk of hooking the string to something and preventing the crossbow from getting in the way of my arms.

 

[svart]

It's quicker to get an assault rifle when the barrel is facing down, but if you get on one knee the muzzle could get ****ty, or here during the winter, filled with snow.

True, but if you get on one knee, you wouldn't carry it on the back on the first place ... but rather move it to the front (over the stomach) or held in the hands while the strap carries some of the weight.

 

[Silver]

Bah, it is much easier to draw a crossbow from that position than a sword, it looks plain silly carrying the bigger swords on the back as it is almost impossible to draw them, unless they are curved, and few of them are.

Carrying the crossbow like that also looks more "fantasy hero" style, which I personally like If a animation could be done drawing the crossbow from there in a cool way it would look great. But while mounted I think the crossbow should be on the horse, sitting at the side or something...

 

[Kissaki]

Greatswords were frequently carried on the back, but naturally they weren't drawn from the back. Slinging it on the back is simply convenient when just carrying it around. In battle, though, the scabbard would be put away and the sword carried to the fight bare.

 

[Silver]

Greatswords were frequently carried on the back, but naturally they weren't drawn from the back. Slinging it on the back is simply convenient when just carrying it around. In battle, though, the scabbard would be put away and the sword carried to the fight bare.

Yes, but it is in the battles it is carried on the back.

 

[Sordid Sinister]

Please stop nitpicking it apart... Previously equipped items were't visible at all and everyone was happy; now they update that and people start *****ing. Jeez.

 

[Merentha]

Please stop nitpicking it apart... Previously equipped items were't visible at all and everyone was happy; now they update that and people start *****ing. Jeez.

*grin*  well, sort of.  We did have quite a few suggestion threads based on visible items, so I wouldn't say everyone was happy.

Kissaki, that was true when two-handers were the primary weapon.  I could see it being sheathed if I was actually an archer who somehow got hold of a good longsword.

Greatswords were frequently carried on the back, but naturally they weren't drawn from the back. Slinging it on the back is simply convenient when just carrying it around. In battle, though, the scabbard would be put away and the sword carried to the fight bare.

Also, you could have a sheath that has metal prongs at the top, a long leather strap, and maybe 6 inches of sheath at the very bottom.  Raise your blade six inches, twist, and your sword is free.  Not sure how historically accurate it is, but Windlass has such a sheath in their catalog.

 

[svart]

Please stop nitpicking it apart... Previously equipped items were't visible at all and everyone was happy; now they update that and people start *****ing. Jeez.

Eh, stop being so passimistic - nobody is *****ing about the visible weapons, everyone likes it.
Just because people want an improvement to a few of the visible items doesn't mean they don't like the whole system ...
The bows, quarrels, one handed weapons and two handed weapons look great ... the crossbows just look upside down to me.

But I guess if they made the swords upside down (blade up, hilt down), you'd tell people to stop nitpicking it too eh ?

 

[Kissaki]

Kissaki, that was true when two-handers were the primary weapon.  I could see it being sheathed if I was actually an archer who somehow got hold of a good longsword.

Most longswords can be carried at the hip, though. I am talking greatswords, for which there is no feasible way to carry at hip. And I believe if you had a greatsword, it was because it was your primary weapon. Its uses are more limited than its shorter brethren, and I think it would be rather inconvenient as a sidearm.

Greatswords were frequently carried on the back, but naturally they weren't drawn from the back. Slinging it on the back is simply convenient when just carrying it around. In battle, though, the scabbard would be put away and the sword carried to the fight bare.

Also, you could have a sheath that has metal prongs at the top, a long leather strap, and maybe 6 inches of sheath at the very bottom.   Raise your blade six inches, twist, and your sword is free.  Not sure how historically accurate it is, but Windlass has such a sheath in their catalog.

I believe Mel Gibson used such a contraption in 'Braveheart', and no, it's not historically accurate as far as I know.