RBM mod Archers

[Fallen Shaman]

Do I just feel like it or does this mod make Archers absolutely useless? they get like one volley off (maybe) before the enemy crashes into you...

[Khergit Horse Archer]

thats why it forces you to use infantry and not run mono type armies.

also, the archers don't fire as rapidly in RBM, and armor makes arrows not deal as much damage unless it's in areas with weaker armor.

and personally for me, it makes the battle feel less "gamey" and "arcadey" but that's my opinion.

tldr: infantry is much more powerful, heavy cavalry is the top dog again, archers and horse archers are just chip damage

[Ruffio]

Originally posted by Khergit Horse Archer:

thats why it forces you to use infantry and not run mono type armies.

also, the archers don't fire as rapidly in RBM, and armor makes arrows not deal as much damage unless it's in areas with weaker armor.

and personally for me, it makes the battle feel less "gamey" and "arcadey" but that's my opinion.

tldr: infantry is much more powerful, heavy cavalry is the top dog again, archers and horse archers are just chip damage

Battle of Agincourt..... you should read up on it. And that at a time when armor was of better quality than what you find in Bannerlord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

[Khergit Horse Archer]

Originally posted by Ruffio:

Originally posted by Khergit Horse Archer:

thats why it forces you to use infantry and not run mono type armies.

also, the archers don't fire as rapidly in RBM, and armor makes arrows not deal as much damage unless it's in areas with weaker armor.

and personally for me, it makes the battle feel less "gamey" and "arcadey" but that's my opinion.

tldr: infantry is much more powerful, heavy cavalry is the top dog again, archers and horse archers are just chip damage

Battle of Agincourt..... you should read up on it. And that at a time when armor was of better quality than what you find in Bannerlord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

as far as i've heard it's a combination of factors and not just cuz omg english longbowmen is op, and i think it's one of the few rare instance where archers were the key players and not the norm.

but i'm no historian and i'm just watching a youtube video ;D

edit: i also don't think the archers penetrated the knight's armor, idk

[Ruffio]

Originally posted by Khergit Horse Archer:

Originally posted by Ruffio:

Battle of Agincourt..... you should read up on it. And that at a time when armor was of better quality than what you find in Bannerlord.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Agincourt

as far as i've heard it's a combination of factors and not just cuz omg english longbowmen is op, and i think it's one of the few rare instance where archers were the key players and not the norm.

but i'm no historian and i'm just watching a youtube video ;D

edit: i also don't think the archers penetrated the knight's armor, idk

"The plate armour of the French men-at-arms allowed them to close the 1,000 yards or so to the English lines while being under what the French monk of Saint Denis described as "a terrifying hail of arrow shot". A complete coat of plate was considered such good protection that shields were generally not used,[75] although the Burgundian contemporary sources distinguish between Frenchmen who used shields and those who did not, and Rogers has suggested that the front elements of the French force used axes and shields.[76] Modern historians are divided on how effective the longbows would have been against plate armour of the time. Modern test and contemporary accounts conclude that arrows could not penetrate the better quality steel armour, which became available to knights and men-at-arms of fairly modest means by the middle of the 14th century, but could penetrate the poorer quality wrought iron armour.[77][78][79][80] Rogers suggested that the longbow could penetrate a wrought iron breastplate at short range and penetrate the thinner armour on the limbs even at 220 yards (200 m). He considered a knight in the best-quality steel armour invulnerable to an arrow on the breastplate or top of the helmet, but vulnerable to shots hitting the limbs, particularly at close range.[81] In any case, to protect themselves as much as possible from the arrows, the French had to lower their visors and bend their helmeted heads to avoid being shot in the face, as the eye- and air-holes in their helmets were among the weakest points in the armour. This head-lowered position restricted their breathing and their vision. "

All in the link I gave you.. Now steel plate armor is not a think in Bannerlord. The best you have in Bannerlord is laminar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laminar_armour

[Khergit Horse Archer]

Originally posted by Ruffio:

Originally posted by Khergit Horse Archer:

as far as i've heard it's a combination of factors and not just cuz omg english longbowmen is op, and i think it's one of the few rare instance where archers were the key players and not the norm.

but i'm no historian and i'm just watching a youtube video ;D

edit: i also don't think the archers penetrated the knight's armor, idk

"The plate armour of the French men-at-arms allowed them to close the 1,000 yards or so to the English lines while being under what the French monk of Saint Denis described as "a terrifying hail of arrow shot". A complete coat of plate was considered such good protection that shields were generally not used,[75] although the Burgundian contemporary sources distinguish between Frenchmen who used shields and those who did not, and Rogers has suggested that the front elements of the French force used axes and shields.[76] Modern historians are divided on how effective the longbows would have been against plate armour of the time. Modern test and contemporary accounts conclude that arrows could not penetrate the better quality steel armour, which became available to knights and men-at-arms of fairly modest means by the middle of the 14th century, but could penetrate the poorer quality wrought iron armour.[77][78][79][80] Rogers suggested that the longbow could penetrate a wrought iron breastplate at short range and penetrate the thinner armour on the limbs even at 220 yards (200 m). He considered a knight in the best-quality steel armour invulnerable to an arrow on the breastplate or top of the helmet, but vulnerable to shots hitting the limbs, particularly at close range.[81] In any case, to protect themselves as much as possible from the arrows, the French had to lower their visors and bend their helmeted heads to avoid being shot in the face, as the eye- and air-holes in their helmets were among the weakest points in the armour. This head-lowered position restricted their breathing and their vision. "

All in the link I gave you.. Now steel plate armor is not a think in Bannerlord. The best you have in Bannerlord is laminar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laminar_armour

well i have no idea what you are trying to tell me here, but i'm just saying without any extra conditions that bannerlord can replicate, archers shouldn't just outright decimate infantry/cavalry and win without effort.

i think many can attest to the fact that archers were immensely powerful, and i think the latest patch has nerfed them, but i haven't touched it so i can't really make a feedback based on that.

[Grubbs008]

Change the reload speed from realistic to vanilla in the mod menu? Problem solved.