Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

New Premium Module: Tyrants of the Moonsea! Read More
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Comments

  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,761
    This guy is just amazing. 3 arrows in 0.6 seconds, holy mother of gum-chewing funk monster....

    lolienCrevsDaakJuliusBorisovBaldursCat
  • AristilliusAristillius Member Posts: 873
    Hahaha, awesome guy and awesome video :) I Like that he is jumping around in jeans and t-shirt, no "speacial gear", he is just having fun!

    lolienJuliusBorisov
  • O_BruceO_Bruce Member Posts: 2,761
    lolien said:

    Wow! Time to reroll and make an archer...

    My next CHARNAME ought to be a evil one, but I guess archer is way to go, then :)

    lolienwubblecmk24JuliusBorisov
  • AnduinAnduin Member Posts: 5,745
    That was the best 5 minutes of my day!

    Awesome! That was how Robin Hood fought!

    But I thought everyone knew this was possible?

    The Huns and The Mongols fought using bows from horseback.

    The simple tactic was to ride in at a canter (trot to slow, gallop seen as too fast for the formation involved, but the aim was faster the better...) Guys at front fire, then canter to the back and reload, Guy behind fires, then canters to the back... You get the picture. A whirlwind of arrows.

    The trick to it was the so called parthian shot, when the horse leaves the ground for a moment, allowing a perfect shot.

    ...

    Kids are forced to learn this stuff in school people.

    lolienJuliusBorisovDungeonnoobtypo_tilly
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156
    edited February 2015
    Anduin said:

    That was the best 5 minutes of my day!

    Awesome! That was how Robin Hood fought!

    But I thought everyone knew this was possible?

    The Huns and The Mongols fought using bows from horseback.

    The simple tactic was to ride in at a canter (trot to slow, gallop seen as too fast for the formation involved, but the aim was faster the better...) Guys at front fire, then canter to the back and reload, Guy behind fires, then canters to the back... You get the picture. A whirlwind of arrows.

    The trick to it was the so called parthian shot, when the horse leaves the ground for a moment, allowing a perfect shot.

    ...

    Kids are forced to learn this stuff in school people.

    I didn't learn that in school!
    In primary school I did Ancient Egypt, Tudors, WW1, WW2 and Romans.
    In secondary school I did Native Americans + battle of little big horn, Romans, Medieval stuff (Norman conquest etc), Causes of WW1 and Causes of WW2, oh I for got I also did 'nam
    Huns and Mongols would have been awesome!

    I will point out that I did in fact learn that from Total war anyway but that's besides the point.

    Post edited by wubble on
    loliencmk24
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156
    @scriver That's a good rant, a rant like that can only come from someone who knows what they're talking about.

    scriverGreenWarlocklolienCrevsDaak
  • scriverscriver Member Posts: 1,823
    Hehe, I have no knowledge at all about archery, so I'll just go with the one who makes the most snarkiest comments :v

    All I know is that when I first watched the video the guy looked really sloppy with his shooting. I wouldn't trust him to shoot an apple from my child's head ;)

    wubblelolienCrevsDaak
  • CerevantCerevant Member Posts: 2,311
    From my point of view, it is snipers vs infantry. The fallacy is that archers *must* fight at range, which this guy debunks. Clearly this guy is fast and accurate at close range.

    elminsterCrevsDaaklolien
  • OneAngryMushroomOneAngryMushroom Member Posts: 564
    This ladies and gentlemen is the reason full plate armor was invented, and why the English longbow was the most hated weapon by the French for over 200 years.

    CrevsDaaklolien
  • BaldursCatBaldursCat Member Posts: 432
    I just had a nerdgasm watching that. Made my currently a bit rubbish day rather better... I'm inspired to head across the road to the archery centre - yes, seriously - not sure they'll let me give it a go like that though.

    JuliusBorisovCrevsDaaklolien
  • SquireSquire Member Posts: 512

    I just had a nerdgasm watching that. Made my currently a bit rubbish day rather better... I'm inspired to head across the road to the archery centre - yes, seriously - not sure they'll let me give it a go like that though.

    Probably not - at least not straight away - but there's nothing to stop you trying it out to see if you like it. :)

    When you're able to handle one of their bows, you can get yourself a wooden bow and practice different methods of shooting...so long as you don't endanger other archers, I can't see it being a problem.

    JuliusBorisovCrevsDaaklolien
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156

    This ladies and gentlemen is the reason full plate armor was invented, and why the English longbow was the most hated weapon by the French for over 200 years.

    longbow's and bodkin arrows weren't very good against plate :(

    We did have a better terrain and an awesome general, also the french cannons were horrendously unreliable

    SionIVCrevsDaak
  • SionIVSionIV Member Posts: 2,686
    wubble said:

    This ladies and gentlemen is the reason full plate armor was invented, and why the English longbow was the most hated weapon by the French for over 200 years.

    longbow's and bodkin arrows weren't very good against plate :(

    We did have a better terrain and an awesome general, also the french cannons were horrendously unreliable
    N..Neera? Is that you?

    Oh i'm sorry, when i read the"horrendously unreliable" i missed the cannon part and something else sprang to my mind.

    CrevsDaakwubbleJuliusBorisov
  • SquireSquire Member Posts: 512
    wubble said:

    This ladies and gentlemen is the reason full plate armor was invented, and why the English longbow was the most hated weapon by the French for over 200 years.

    longbow's and bodkin arrows weren't very good against plate :(
    Sadly, I've heard that to be the case. Even heavy bodkins didn't do a very good job of punching through plate armour. Mail, perhaps, but not plate. Even so, the mail, together with the jack, tended to absorb a lot of the arrow's impact, doing relatively little damage to the person. The idea was more to put so many arrows into somebody that they become a walking pincushion, and are hampered by lots of shafts sticking out of them. The Hollywood image of an arrow hitting someone in the chest, punching through the cuirass and killing them instantly, is a myth...you'd be lucky to get a one-shot kill with a bow against a hardened soldier. Not saying it can't be done, but it's not as easy as films make it look.

    The thing about Agincourt was that the English had a lot of bowmen who could shoot quickly, and there were hundreds of arrows raining down on the French knights. It was like charging against a machine gun.

    Of course, I could be wrong too, but this is what I've gathered from many internet resources, as well as TV shows that examined the actual damage properties of such weapons, and the protective properties of armour, that debunk the Hollywood myth of the one-hit kill. After all, bows went out of use in Europe after the 15th century, most likely because it wasn't much use against newer, better armour. Bear in mind, though, that the Hollywood myth of an entire army in plate armour is also a myth; plate armour was expensive, and a common soldier could not afford it. A medieval battlefield tended to consist of a very small percentage of knights in full harness. Also, plate armour was new, and bows were in use long before it ever saw service. Orion's version of Excalibur has it totally wrong when it shows Arthurian knights wearing 15th century armour. Until then, mail was the standard.

    Incidentally, when guns got too good for armour to be of any use, they started to doff the armour bit by bit, favouring the increased mobility that being lightly armoured offered you, so that you could take the first volley and charge down infantry before they reloaded, hence the invention of bayonets. From knights in full harness, to 17th century cuirassers/hussars, to 18/19th century sabre wielding dragoons...there's a reason for every development/change in warfare.

    lolienNimranwubbleelminster
  • skinnydragonskinnydragon Member Posts: 110
    From what I've seen agincourt was largely due to the composition of our army. We had a large number of common soldiers and we even paid them. The French expected their usual honour duels and ransoms and weren't ready for an army that wanted to do the job and get home. Also executing the prisoners when you realised your army needed the food was a different approach.

    In short we broke the rules of warfare and used a professional army both tactics that tend to win wars

    wubble
Sign In or Register to comment.