Jump to content


Photo

Archer Long / Long Bow


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Jaime

Jaime

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 21 November 2014 - 03:30 PM

Why do they cost 5000/Year? They are ridiculously expensive, Knights costs only 3000/Year and they are supposedly the élite...

Thoughts? Opinions?



#2 Tisoon

Tisoon

    Advanced Member

  • Arbitres
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,201 posts
  • LocationFrance

Posted 21 November 2014 - 03:38 PM

We can discuss about the cost. We have all our own opinion about that.

If they fight against cavalrymen/knights/heavy knights, their strengh is 6 (bonus of x2), against 5 for the heavy knights. Another point is about PP, it costs only 1PP when you need 2 for heavy knights.
Amicalement Tisoon

#3 Jaime

Jaime

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 90 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 01:28 AM

Why is their strength x2 only when they fight against soldiers on horse (and who are Heavy Knights?) wouldn't it be more logical that it was x2 for soldiers on foot? I know they count x2 in defense on a siege, but are they worth it as an attacking force?



#4 Tisoon

Tisoon

    Advanced Member

  • Arbitres
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,201 posts
  • LocationFrance

Posted 22 November 2014 - 07:06 AM

I don't know what is the good translation of "Chevaliers en armure de plates" ^^. They are those knights with a strengh of 5. Maybe Heavy cavalry? Armored knights?

Longbowmen are efficient against cavalry only ("Facteur combat multiplié par 2 contre la cavalerie"), not about siege.
http://www.marchofhi...A9guli.C3.A8res (that's in French :s).

Archers have a bonus for siege, not Longbowmen.
So Longbowmen are just efficient against cavalry. It could be a good choice to protect your siege weapons.

About the historical reasons of this bonus, I don't know. Sorry.
Amicalement Tisoon

#5 Gamaliel

Gamaliel

    Z'arbitre

  • Arbitres
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 09:04 AM

Il n'y en a pas. J'ai deux potes qui font de la reconstitution médiévale dont un qui fait un doctorat en histoire médiévale et ils sont formels là-dessus : à moins que les cavaliers ne soient assez con pour lancer une charge frontale (et sur plus de trois rangs), ils ne peuvent pas perdre face à des archers.

Ce bonus rend d'ailleurs les chevaliers useless : un combo piquiers + archers longs et c'en est fini d'eux, à un coût bien moindre. L'utilisation obligatoire des engins de siège ne fait qu'accentuer cet état de fait.

#6 vince_von_reich

vince_von_reich

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 724 posts

Posted 23 November 2014 - 01:51 PM

oui il y a eut qu'une seul fois ou la cavalerie a été a ce point défoncé par les archer long anglais, mais c'est plus dut a une succession de pb pour la cavalerie francaise que grace aux archer long...



#7 PiperHecht

PiperHecht

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 5 posts

Posted 24 November 2014 - 05:24 PM

About the historical reasons of this bonus, I don't know. Sorry.

At various moment in the English-French history of Love/Hatred, English longbowmen knocked down the French calvary: Battle of Sluys (bataille de l'Ecluse), Crécy, Poitiers, Azincourt... There are probably other examples but those are quite famous.



#8 vince_von_reich

vince_von_reich

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 724 posts

Posted 24 November 2014 - 05:31 PM

http://www.animation...aile-ecluse.php

bataille de l'écluse => bataille naval, quel est le rapport avec l'avantage des archers long face aux cavaliers?

pour les autres sans date je n'arrive pas a trouver a part azincourt...



#9 Gamaliel

Gamaliel

    Z'arbitre

  • Arbitres
  • PipPipPip
  • 3,519 posts

Posted 24 November 2014 - 09:12 PM

Et si elles sont si célèbres, c'est justement parce qu'elles restent des exceptions.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users