[MUD-Dev] not about pk anymore

[Matt Chatterley]

On Sun, 13 Jul 1997, Alex Oren wrote:

[Huge snippage, including Marian]

> I remember a long debate on an AD&D newsgroup (when I still browsed it)
> regarding the speed, range and damage of longbows and crossbows.

So do I. They seem frequent. =)
 
> After what seemed to be a pretty thorough research of medieval arms, the
> consensus reached was:

Yeah - I've got (some) experience with longbows (obviously modernised
ones, and not crossbows).
 
> Crossbows are usually cocked with mechanical aids.

Which is one of their big plusses - you can load it, and carry it
(carefully) around loaded, without having to hang onto a string.

> -> Longbow firing rate is higher.

Depending on how skilled you are.

> -> Crossbows may be fired just as effectively by weak or injured persons.

Provided it doesn't need to be wound up, or have a particularly heavy
mechanism to wind. The *would* be more effective for the less capable
normally, I agree.
 
> Crossbows have stronger pull, flatter trajectory and heavier ammo.

Yes. I imagine this is true.

> -> Longbows have longer range.
> -> Crossbows are more accurate.

I dispute this though - over longer range, I'd expect it to be easier to
strike target with a longbow, given skill, than a crossbow.

> -> Crossbows do more damage at short ranges (actually pierce HEAVY armor).

Definitely, plus are fireable at short to pointblank - bows are much
harder to manage due to aiming time. Longbows are I imagine, far more
lethal at long range.
 
> Crossbows are much easier to use.
> -> It takes a long time to train a longbowman but every peasant can be
>    decent with a crossbow after practicing a couple of days.

This of course is another big point.

Regards,
	-Matt Chatterley
	http://user.itl.net/~neddy/index.html
"Never enter an arsekicking contest with a porcupine."-Cohen The Barbarian