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
The author of this topic has marked a post as the answer to their question.
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
They are large and awkward to handle (in hands only) - and the game rules require you to drop it where you can find it later, but off an npc route... but it is quite feasible to run a polearm and very effective to do so.
https://www.nexusmods.com/kingdomcomedeliverance/mods/404?tab=files
AFAIK polearms got nerfed specifically because they are OP, especially on horseback
one logic behind this that i read is that polearm is common to use in the frontline, not while adventuring. Its like bringing an AR around instead of pistol. It's quite powerful, that's why its designed only for player to use it as "power gear" temp if they loot some dead bodies. But it's there, the item and the perks so that AI can use it prob. That's why mod
So, I like the idea of polearms, and have used a few, but since there's no way to really store them when not in combat, kind of impractical.
As far as this statement goes... "there's a reason why the 15th century warfare was pike and hammer and not sword and shield...." Yes, and... no.
When the famed Swiss Pikemen made their bones at Sempach, European monarchs went nuts recruiting them and they became the defacto foot formation imitated all over Europe, but not all at once: mercenaries were hugely expensive, thus over time monarchs began adopting their tactics and weapons, the pike and resultant square formations. This led to the 'push of pike' battles that were typical in much of the 15th and 16th centuries. But not all pikemen formations were equal; the Swiss were the gold standard for pike discipline, Flemish pikemen, too; but other armies weren't always up to speed on Swiss methods and tactics, so results may vary if you're looking to replicate that Sempach glory moment.
The problem with pike formations is that they are highly vulnerable to archers at range and nimble swordsmen up close - the English Yeoman archers were the bane of any Scots in schiltron formations, and men-at-arms in general, and Spanish Tercio units were the gold standard in European battles for a hundred years or so. What made the Tercio units so effective was the use of pikemen, swordsmen, and arquebusiers, in a combined arms tactic that allowed the pikemen to keep opposing pikemen at length while the rodeleros would engage them up close and personal, while the arquebusiers would shoot into formations as they approached.
Pikes are also best deployed in formations, because individual pikemen are vulnerable and slow. This is also reflected in the game; next time you encounter a peasant with a pike, try engaging with a sword and see just how fast your attacks are versus his. Or, just stand back and engage him with your bow, he'll look like a pincushion by the time he gets anywhere near you.
And crossbows, where to start; the crossbow had a lot going for it, like ease of use for a n00b. Archers, especially good ones, trained for most of their lives, but you could stick a crossbow in a feudal levy's hands and have a good range attack in a few short weeks', or even days', training. The heavier crossbows could even punch through some armor. But, the typical crossbow had an abysmal rate of fire compared to archers, and had other vulnerabilities, too; Agincourt and Crecy were two battles where crossbowmen were on the field but were outranged and outshot by Yeoman archers, mostly because crossbows are vulnerable to moisture in ways that a bow is not. Many armies also integrated archers and crossbowmen, archers to keep up the volleys and crossbowmen to provide the added punch. When firearms became more ubiquitous in the 16th century, the bow and crossbow began to fade, too, but again, this did not happen overnight.
Crossbows at the time were also very clumsy and unwieldy, and they were entirely unsuited for more menial day-to-day stuff, like hunting. Remember, these weren't the sleek hand-held crossbows you see today in stores, these things were heavy and had precision parts often custom-made for the typical model (mass production was not a thing at the time). A crossbow was a military weapon, whereas a bow was cheaper and pretty ubiquitous at the time.
One more thing; crossbows have been around since at least 650 BC in China, with use in the Roman empire right up to around the 5th century. They didn't make their reappearance in Europe till about the 10th century; yet still, archers remained a large component, sometimes the only ranged component of a military force. Why is that? Turns out that archers are cheap, and far cheaper than crossbowmen, who would have to pay teams to support them. If you're a minor lord in a remote part of the Holy Roman empire, you don't have a lot of spare scratch to pay Genoese crossbowmen, especially if you're constantly feuding with a neighboring lord. Archers, now those guys are everywhere, and bows are much cheaper to make.
If KCD 2 ever comes out, I'd like to see it in the context of the Hussite wars. There you'd see crossbows, they were much more prevalent in those battles.
Such is my long post.
Cut all the empty words. To prove a point and to ask you to be on point. What you said does not go against anything I said, at all. In fact, helps my argument.
"crossbows were expensive" AS IF FULL PLATE METAL SUITS OF ARMOR ARE CHEESE PRICED. AND THEY ARE IN THE GAME. AND THE CAME AFTER CROSSBOWS.
you made 0 mentions of hammers or such weapons, or non pike weapons like the ones in the game, glaves and spears, which were not pikes. I used pikes to better reflect the era, 15 adn 16th century was full of bec de corbin, glaives, pikes, harberds, bill hooks , staff swords and other similar things, they became popular after plate was introduced due to the reduced use of shields cuz plate. Literally you cant penetrate a plate armor with a bow and arrow, crossbows weren't doing any better. Which is why warhammers were introduced, and why swords lost face.
Fair enough on the empty words, it was late and I was on a medieval Kerouac screed.
Why no crossbows in KCD? I dunno, ask the devs: maybe the they found it a pain in the ass to code. But I don't think it would be practical for every day use as I mentioned above: clumsy, heavy, slow rate of fire, expensive. Not suited to most tasks outside the battlefield. Not something a medieval peasant would have wanted to use in daily life, or have access to without a Lord funding procurement (see expensive to make, especially for an iron/steel bow span).
Plate armor was also expensive, but you could wear it, sleep in it, run in it if you had to, etc. Was highly prized as battlefield loot, much more than a crossbow.
As for your premise that crossbows couldn't penetrate plate, that's right - it took an arbalest with 1k lbs. draw weight to do that kind of damage, but an arbalest is a heavy-ass weapon, so why would you and a team of your best friends drag it around with you unless you're in a medieval battle formation (to my point on the mobility/efficacy of crossbows in general). BUT, crossbows COULD and DID penetrate other more common armor types, like leather, scale, and chain. So there you go: useful, but to a point.
Your premise that swords lost favor is also incorrect in my opinion.
The sword was very much still in use by nobles, gentry, and commoners when they could get their hands on one. All pikemen carried a sidearm in addition to their pikes, usually a sword, dagger, or similar, and would use it in close up combat where pikes would not be useful. Swords never 'lost face', but were certainly used as well as hammers, axes, billhooks, etc., and all of those weapons were in use long before the 15th century. They did not crowd out the sword as you state, but were part of military arsenals for centuries before and after. In fact, the simple spear in all its iterations was probably the most used weapon for foot soldiers throughout pre-firearms history, because it was effective and cheap. Warhammers weren't 'invented' per se, but they did get better, with a nice metal haft and a pokey spike for getting at those squishy bits. Improved, but not invented.
Swords remained popular and part of the medieval arsenal for centuries, and much ink was spilled over their use and tactics - consider these manuscripts and manuals that go in great length to discuss sword fighting, such as “Starhemberg” manuscript (1452), Hans Lecküchner’s langes Messer(falchion) treatise (1482), Paulus Hector Mair’s Ars Athletica(c. 1550), and Joachim Meyer’s Art of Combat(published version 1570, manuscript draft c. 1568). Note the publication years of all those manuals (15th and 16th centuries). You're thesis, if I'm correct in understanding, that swords lost their utility during our Henry's time, appears to be counterveiled by these very contemporary publications.
Also, a quote from a paper, "An Introduction to Medieval and Renaissance Combat" (c) Jeffrey Lang, 2010-2014:
The longsword, also called the bastard sword or hand-and-a-half sword, was the classic weapon of the knight in the late Middle Ages. It was chiefly used in the 1300s and 1400s, but survived as a sport weapon into the 1700s.
See https://users.wpi.edu/~jforgeng/Forgeng_Introduction_to_Historical_Combat.pdf for reference.
Hope that there were fewer 'empty words' here and more substance to refute your thesis of what 15th century warfare entailed.
Enjoy.
I agree, it would be a nice addition. I'm hoping that if they ever do KCD 2, it'll be set in the Hussite wars, we'd see plenty of crossbows then.