View Single Post
Old 11-01-07, 10:22 PM   #22 (permalink)
Stewan Seagull
Senior Member
 
Stewan Seagull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Baked Delights, Trinsic
Posts: 261
My Mood:
Stewan Seagull is on a distinguished road
Points: 2,476, Level: 32 Points: 2,476, Level: 32 Points: 2,476, Level: 32
Activity: 2% Activity: 2% Activity: 2%
Send a message via ICQ to Stewan Seagull
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaelith View Post
I seriously doubt longbowmen could fire every 2 seconds. considering the wieght of the bows were a minimum of 100 lbs they were heavy bows! I think i've heard that a well trained longbowman could fire an effective shot once every 6 seconds. which is insanely fast as it is once you consider there is probably half a second of pause once the arrow is loosed, a second picking out the next arrow and maybe another second or two to put it to the string.

but i get your point arrow storms were savage!
100lbs sure is a heavy bow. I usually shoot 30lbs and assuming these boys had a lot more training and being used to 100 lbs, i think 6 seconds is to much. let?s agree on 4

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorien View Post
A skilled longbowman could put about 4 aimed arrows in the air per minute rather than 30.
Well that?s the nice thing about mass combat - there?s almost no aiming needed Just hit the enemy regiment and all is fine.
4 per minute is like 15 seconds per arrow. What do you want to do all the time? Even for a trained archer holding a stretched 100 lber is difficult - after a few seconds your aim will just get worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogoose View Post
Here's a favourite discussion point of mine:

A 14th century European knight could beat, in single dismounted combat, a Japanese Samurai from the same era. A lot of people I know seem to back the Samurai, because as we all know the Japanese have magical powers and a katana can cut through a Challenger Tank and weighs less than an idea, but I think the knight would win because he is at least the equal in training to the samurai, physically much bigger and stronger, and wearing armour that is proof against a sword cut on most of its surface area.

Discuss.
I?d give the Samurai the movement advantage, their armor was a lot lighter, but katanas were designed to cut, so maybe little good against plate.
In comparison european swords were like edged clubs

I think as long as our knight remains standing he?s all good and probably can beat the Samurai to pulp, but once he stumbles and falls he?s dead meat.
Stewan Seagull is offline   Reply With Quote