Swadian Sharpshooters vs Viegar Archers
- Thread starter Kniggit
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
NorphTehDwarf
Recruit
Yep. In a real world, it'd all come down to the training of the respective groups. Crossbows were well-liked because they could be used with a minimum of training. Proper use of the bow, however, would take years of practice, so in all likelyhood, a bow unit could take down a crossbow unit.
Yeah, any damage over 100 is really pointless, since i've never seen NPC's with more that like...90 hp. I'd rather a weapon that fires faster dealing 100 damage than a slower firing one that does 250ish. But about the AI, as previously stated, crossbowmen win. They just seem to hit more often. But about Swadians being better than Vaegir 9/10 of the time, thats not true. The absolute best party is nothing but knights, and anything else is just for fun and aesthetic reasons. And Vaegir knights own everything, since they use 2handed weapons. The Vaegir's run by and slice an enemy and keep going, where as the Swads tend to...stop and get swamped because of their shorter reach, in my experiences anyway.
Kyanor
Recruit
Good old "Crossbow is easier to use then bow" well not really, sure it was easy to aim but the loading was dangerous and hard, you could easily get rid off some extra fingers if you fumble it. But crossbows were much more powerful in close range then traditional bows because of their flat trajectory and other factors. For long range combat normal bow, for closer combat crossbow. And stop listening to english "crossbow was a weapon of cowards because we used longbows" historians.
jackx
Sergeant at Arms
The vaegir knights are only useful against enemies that forgot to bring their ranged weapons... against swadians (who tend to have rather many crossbowmen 
) and sea raiders, you can consider yourself lucky if some of them survive their first attack run... at least in my (limited) experience, that is...
) and sea raiders, you can consider yourself lucky if some of them survive their first attack run... at least in my (limited) experience, that is...OddjobXL
Recruit
I think alot of the bias towards the romanticised version of bowmen, over crossbowmen, comes less from Anglo-centrism than the actual position of clergy and noblemen on the crossbow. It could punch through expensive armor and even some shields. That could kill a guy! Even a rich guy who'd spent all his money on good armor and barding for his horses. No fair! Only flunkies, peasants and vassals are supposed to get killed, noblemen and knights were in it for the honor and sport of it all. If they're captured they just get ransomed back. Good show and all that.
I remember reading about one king, I think Henry II, fighting against one of his uppity sons who was leading a revolt. It was almost cordial. Henry II granting a letter of passage to one of his son's retainers in order to keep his son safe. And so forth. It wasn't until a unit of mercenary crossbowmen fired on The King that there was an outcry and the Prince was accused of attempting to assassinate the his father!
And there are alot of stories about clergy trying to reduce violence and chaos by outlawing tournaments or various other bloody hobbies of the nobility. One constant was the attempt to get crossbows banned from the battlefield.
I remember reading about one king, I think Henry II, fighting against one of his uppity sons who was leading a revolt. It was almost cordial. Henry II granting a letter of passage to one of his son's retainers in order to keep his son safe. And so forth. It wasn't until a unit of mercenary crossbowmen fired on The King that there was an outcry and the Prince was accused of attempting to assassinate the his father!
And there are alot of stories about clergy trying to reduce violence and chaos by outlawing tournaments or various other bloody hobbies of the nobility. One constant was the attempt to get crossbows banned from the battlefield.
Mechstra
Sergeant
Kyanor said:
Crossbows had a longer range than even longbows. The reason the longbow was better was that it could fire quite a bit faster and the archers could easily close the gap and fire off a few arrows before the crossbowmen could fire their second shot.
And I've never heard of that particular school of historical thought - sounds like you've got a persecution complex.
i think alot of people are assuming the best. crossbows have been known to reach 650 pound draw weights, but i garuntee you that they dont look like whats in M&B. i would exspect a steel prod crossbow of M&B size to be about 250#s tops.
the same goes for the longbow. i know of them reaching 150#s and have heard of 180. but its just not typical. we here alot of stories about how xbows or Lbows puching through plate. can it do it? maybe. will it do it consistantly? certainly not.
i think the way its handled in M&B is spot on, with a few exceptions. AI archers dont fire rapidly enough. they seem indecisive wheather to shoot or malee. crossbows and reload about a half second too fast. id also like to see "sniper" crossbows to have goatsfeet, cranquins, or windlasses and a signifigantly longer reload time. The AI also doesent lead targets.
the same goes for the longbow. i know of them reaching 150#s and have heard of 180. but its just not typical. we here alot of stories about how xbows or Lbows puching through plate. can it do it? maybe. will it do it consistantly? certainly not.
i think the way its handled in M&B is spot on, with a few exceptions. AI archers dont fire rapidly enough. they seem indecisive wheather to shoot or malee. crossbows and reload about a half second too fast. id also like to see "sniper" crossbows to have goatsfeet, cranquins, or windlasses and a signifigantly longer reload time. The AI also doesent lead targets.
