Recruitable Unit Rebalance Version 7.51 Released.

[BigDaddy]

wombatsSAR said:

. . .Sim: xbows blow away everything else in terms of sheer hitting power. At least the steel variety. . .

I looked into this for quite some time to prove that medieval x-bow where more powerful than medieval longbows. However, I found that that wasn't the case. Because of the inferior engineering and material medieval x-bow where made from, they where limited to a very short draw length, and the quarrel never even remotely approached its maximum velocity. Because of the respective weight of the missles, both end up being nearly the same. The difference from my historical research, was that longbowmen where actual troops, who carried swords, wore light armor, and could really fight. They fired faster, and hit more. A x-bowman, was just a conscript with an x-bow.

Today's x-bow have an incredible draw length. The bow goes from nearly straight to "V" shaped. This increased draw lenght allows the projectile to reach incredible velocities. Far superior even to compound bows. That was not the case in medieval times.

[BigDaddy]

I also found this:

"Surprisingly, a good slinger hurled a stone as far and accurately as a good archer. Roman military texts recommended archery target practice at about 200 yards. Slingers are known to hurl their projectiles even farther, as much as 440 yards (quarter of a mile)."

Sling stones ranged from golf ball sized pieces of lead to rocks the size of a tennis balls, and where tooled round. Slinging was a sort of game to ancient people, who made their own stones, and practiced for fun.

Also,
"As for accuracy, one ancient writer noted that the best slingers "would wound not merely the heads of their enemies but any part of the face at which they might have aimed." Experiments demonstrate that missiles leave a sling in excess of 60 miles per hour. One Roman writer noted that opponents in leather armor were in far greater danger from sling missiles than arrows. Even if the stone did not penetrate the armor, it was capable of inflicting a fatal internal injury."

I couldn't find information on the effectiveness of armor on slingstones, but I'd just assume slingstone aren't AP.

[Arralen]

Concerning Staff Slings
http://www.staff.ncl.ac.uk/nikolas.l...taffsling.html
that's what I read from it (someone should check vs. historical sources)
- staff slings do more damage (due to heavier projectiles), but do not necessarily shoot further
- normal slings may carry a shield (AFAIK, historically they didn't, but would be nice in DOM )

Concerning BigDaddy's post:
That's basically what I said before. Nice to see that someone checks the sources instead of re-telling misconceptions from Hollywood Movies ... Didn't have the time to dig anything up myself besides the Wargamers Research Groups Tabletop Rules.

Btw., those roman texts speak about shortbows, o.c., which are roughly equal to slings.
Concerning the range, one has to be careful that not effective and maximum range is compared - what I believe is the case with the above figures.

It's very obvious, however, that slings and bows (longbows too) where used for "mass archery", not for sniping.

Xbows where used in siege warfare and as sniper weapons against (and from) infantry forming a "shield wall".


Here's a pic from the "Maciejowski-Bible" (ca. 1250 A.D. ; Piermont Morgan Library, New York), which clearly shows:

- usage of iron pot-helmets and full chain (which even covers the hands) by knights and infantry.
- the Xbow-man only has (darker) leather cap and no chain mail, he's protected by a heavily armored infantry man with shield
- the Xbow is not pressed against the shoulder, it doesn't have a rifle stock.
- Xbow is used to snipe at single defenders, obviously successful

.

[wombatsSAR]

BigDaddy said:
I also found this:

"Surprisingly, a good slinger hurled a stone as far and accurately as a good archer. Roman military texts recommended archery target practice at about 200 yards. Slingers are known to hurl their projectiles even farther, as much as 440 yards (quarter of a mile)."

Could you toss the source for this quote at me? I know I've read it as well but can't recall where now. As regards to penetration, I do remember someone else claiming that a sling could cause spalling on a bronze cuirass. Again, not worth that much without a reference.

[wombatsSAR]

BigDaddy said:

I looked into this for quite some time to prove that medieval x-bow where more powerful than medieval longbows. However, I found that that wasn't the case. Because of the inferior engineering and material medieval x-bow where made from, they where limited to a very short draw length, and the quarrel never even remotely approached its maximum velocity. Because of the respective weight of the missles, both end up being nearly the same.

hmmm, that would contradict what Payne-Gallway has claimed for his experience in actually firing some bows from around that time, in terms of range. I do realize that medieval metallurgy was no where near a modern standard. Some sources claim that the shattering of the steelbow could seriously injure the user. That's probably seldom a modern problem. As for the two being nearly the same in practice, could be. My only real argument is with the recruitment scheme.

The difference from my historical research, was that longbowmen where actual troops, who carried swords, wore light armor, and could really fight. They fired faster, and hit more. A x-bowman, was just a conscript with an x-bow.

Aye, that would be the biggest advantage, afaict for the xbow. It was given to a peasant and he could actually hit something and do so with enough force to hurt the target.



[/quote]Today's x-bow have an incredible draw length. The bow goes from nearly straight to "V" shaped. This increased draw lenght allows the projectile to reach incredible velocities. Far superior even to compound bows. That was not the case in medieval times.

[/quote]

... and because I'm feeling combative, can you list your sources for your assertions regarding the effectiveness of the xbow? Actually, it's also that I like reading up on such things.