Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
A good crossbow does not need to have the best poundage. The more powerful the crossbow the longer it will take to reload, especially the medieval ones which you had to put some elbow grease into there is definitely a point at which you'd consider if you really need 800 pounds of force, if you could have 400 and fire twice as often. Or maybe even faster, there is a HUGE difference in firing speed between the heaviest crossbows that need special cranks to actually reload, and the light ones that can be just pulled with your own arms. You will be able to shoot the latter multiple times in a row before you shoot the heaviest one even once. For reference, 200 pound bows are considered to be pretty powerful already. Even the lighter crossbows would pack at least as much of a punch, if not more.
Also, there is nothing inherent that makes crossbows have a shallower firing arc, that's actually completely backwards as crossbow bolts have less range than arrows. It's all a matter of poundage, the higher the power of the crossbow the shallower the arc will be over the same distance. And since crossbows are in general higher power than bows, that's what you usually see. But, if you made a 200 pound crossbow and compared it to 200 pound bow, you'd see that the arrow from a bow will have way more range and the trajectory will be flatter due to the arrow being better at maintaining flight than a bolt. Bolts are heavier and built to basically go as fast as possible to maximize penetration. This comes at the expense of range obviously. So no, crossbows don't have flatter trajectory, they only do if they are much stronger than a bow. I bet a bow would fire farther and have a flatter trajectory than a crossbow that has twice it's poundage.
The biggest advantage of a crossbow isn't actually that it is stronger. A really heavy bow can do monstrous damage already and can be fired so much faster than a crossbow, if that was the only factor bows would laughably out compete crossbows. The thing that made it effective was that anybody could use it and it required minimal training. To use a bow effectively you need much more training, and you also have to be really physically fit to do it over extended periods of time. A crossbow? Literally just learn how to crank it, how to point and shoot it. Much less effort and physical fitness required, you could literally give it to peasants and put them on the battlements and they would do a good enough job with it.
So for the sake of argumentation, what makes a bow much more difficult to use correctly, you could say "just pull the string, point in a direction, and shoot", as a crossbow.
So in Attila you have a imaginary box around each unit model. For the purpose of firing the Ai assume they are the size of that box and try to avoid hitting it. Then you have projectile stats, which includes speed. The drop of a projectile is kinda simulated and a faster moving one drops at a longer range. They also have a max firing arch if I recall. So no pointing a musket at the sky and letting it fall in front....as fun as that would be.
The speed of the projectile also determines the range. You could set the range of your bows to 9999999 in the files and it only tells the AI it can target out to that range. They wont actually be able to hit anything because of the lack of projectile speed. However something more reasonable might work just fine.
I would imagine the crossbows have a fast projectile speed and somewhat low firing arch. This results in them needing to aim higher than they physically can to hit the units in front of your troops. If you move them back 2-3 times further they would likely fire more.
Don't take that as gospel, it just what I remember from the Attila files. It could be completely different here, or I could be misremembering something. Also, next time you have a ranged unit selected hold down the left alt. It will show you the spread on the projectile at that range. The shots should land withing the circle. Very useful for artillery. Right clicking with left alt held down gives an order to fire at the ground. It can be great for close artillery support. It a great way to get an idea on accuracy without consulting the files.
Bows and crossbows CAN shoot indirectly - meaning over your units, or over terrain - and hit enemies on the other side.
Muskets can NOT shoot over your own units, or over terrain, to hit enemies on the other side, UNLESS you use terrain elevation to give them clear line of fire.
If an indirect fire unit has its line of sight obstructed by a friendly unit, it will NOT fire automatically, but it WILL do so if ordered to.
Therefore, if you rely on a line of infantry to screen your ranged units, you need to give firing orders once your front line is engaged with the enemy for your ranged units to remain effective.
a bow requires a lot of strength and technique to consistently pull, and practice for accuracy.
I think the rules about having to gather for archery practice on Sunday afternoon might still be in the statute books in the UK.
The Welsh Longbowmen knew their skills were in demand (Agincourt days) and could charge a fortune, while you could give a crossbow / musket to any (cheap) idiot and have mass fire.
With a crossbow the trajectory is straight, so you just point and shoot (or raise a little).
With a bow you may be at a 45% angle. and the arrow will come down at an angle.
Getting that right against a static target is hard, against a moving target...
I think it wasn't till about 1900's that a firearm could outshoot a longbow in range, accuracy and rate of fire...
Although I think Jack Churchill killing a German in WW2 might have been its last use in battle.
Anybody who tried shooting a bow at least once knows that it's not just about "pulling the string, pointing and shooting". I already touched briefly on why shooting a bow is much more difficult in my comment. There are two major factors: physical fitness and skill, and they both are hugely dependent on one another. You need A LOT of strength to pull a bow that would actually be used in combat, they are nothing like those recreational things that they let people fire at fairs or camps. When I say 200 poundage bow, that literally means that pulling the bowstring will feel like you're pulling 200 pounds of weight that is constantly fighting against you to break free. And you have to do that with a single arm (and the rest of your upper body muscles). Imagine how fit a person needs to be to keep doing that MULTIPLE times in a row.
I am not a pro at shooting bows, far from it. I only shot them on occasion and got limited training. But it's not an easy thing. If you have no idea what you're doing, you can literally hurt yourself. I've seen pictures of people who got their skin torn off by a bowstring of a powerful bow, simply because they fired it incorrectly. And that's just the start. There is actual technique involved in pulling the bow, you don't do it with just the arm, you pull with the entire upper body. Then imagine you are holding close to 200 pounds of force in your hand, and you have to aim it and shoot it at a target in a very short time, because after just a moment your arms will start shaking from being too tired of holding all that weight and you will miss. Then you need to actually hold the bow perfectly aligned so the shot won't go sideways. Then you have to consider factors like wind because arrows are highly affected by it. Then there is so much more that I do not even know. A difference between a skilled bowmen and a beginner is staggering. A fit and experienced bowmen will be able to pull a bow much stronger than you can, shoot accurately at ranges you would never hit your target, and shoot like 4 arrows at the target before you can shoot even one.
Compare that to a crossbow:
- You pull a string with both your hands or crank it, you can then let it go and it will stay loaded as long as necessary, no strength required to hold it. You place a bolt exactly where it needs to be, every single time. No need to practice how to hold an arrow with your fingers and how to properly rest it against your hand.
- Aiming with a crossbow is as easy as making sure the bolt is pointed straight at the target, and you can literally look right the middle of it to make sure, and take as much time as you want to align the shot. With a bow you have to keep the bow pulled and aim very quickly, the arrow is slightly off to the side so you have to correct for that mentally.
- To fire a crossbow you just press the trigger and the thing flies off. With a bow, you release the bowstring and have to make sure you're doing it when being very still, not being affected by the forces exerted on the bow by the string you've just released.
- A bolt is heavier, shorter and therefore firmer, it will be less affected by wind and fly relatively straight towards the target, and when you're using a powerful crossbow the bolt will also be quicker and have a shallower arc, making shooting things even easier. With a bow, arrows are longer and lighter, so it takes longer for them to reach the target and they are more susceptible to wind.
Well, that's about as far as my limited practical knowledge with bows goes. TL/DR here is: Firing a bow, especially one powerful enough to actually be useful in combat, is significantly harder than people realize and takes a lot of practice to be effective with. A crossbow can be used by anybody who has enough strength to pull the strong in it's place, which honestly would be most fighting age men at the time, especially if there was any kind of reloading aid. My 15 years old sister at the time fired a light crossbow (I think it was around 150lbs) and hit her target 8 times in a row after the first 2 missed practice shots, I only had to help her pull the string. She only hit the target a single time with a practice bow, after 9 misses we had her move closer to the target and she barely hit it from like 15 or so meters. That's how big of a difference there is.
(just like canon can shoot over your unit)
Yep, even guns in this game arc very slightly, they don't shoot perfectly straight, and in some rare cases they can shoot over other unit heads. Often resulting in a healthy dose of friendly fire though.
Police can use weak crossbows, but for regular shots in most cases a bow is fine
the other advantage and main purpose of a crossbow then is extremely powerful and armor piercing shots that are stronger than what is normally available even from trained archers
which brings an incidental point, though consequential in grave matters of warfare and the state, in that crossbows allow mass mobilization of ranged troops beyond having to have a trained archer corps
but here I am referring to Chinese crossbows before the Mongols' and gunpowder age, which owing to their more modern trigger systems aided by bronze casting technology, could have far longer power strokes than western designs
this enabled more powerful crossbows for a given size, and as mentioned above mass manufacture and armament
the most successful armies combined trained composite bowmen with composite crossbows, with spear shield frontline and the crossbowmen armed with glaive polearms. + dragoons and cavalry