181–188 of 188 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And this was a weapon for the yeomanry, not the guys whose entire lives were devoted to maintaining military prowess. Yes in fact they did spend their whole lives practicing. (From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_longbow#Training ): "Longbows were very difficult to master because the force required to deliver an arrow through the improving armour of medieval Europe was very high by modern standards ... etons o…
Perhaps I was a bit ambiguous - they were free farmers, not professional soldiers. Even if they spent a good deal of time practicing, it was not their primary pursuit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It will also have to drastically downplay the importance of footwork. In a real swordfight, where to put your feet is nearly as important as where to put the sword.
If it were a real [sword] fight most couldn't play. It's a game. Certain allowances have to made for ease of use. I mean, do you really think COD is "real combat"?
"most couldn't play" - but they could learn to play (as long as losing isn't fatal for the player). some games strive to be realistic above all else (some car racing games), because they are tailored for the ultra-enthusiasts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your rate is low. A semi-decent archer (which most men were, practicing every Sunday after church) should be able to loose at least 12 arrows/minute. Most students (~80%) are able to do that, safely, after about 4 3-hour training sessions, 2 weeks apart. Admittedly, they're only using 30-40lb bows, and can only do it for 1 minute, but that's just lack of strength/stamina which comes from practice. A fair proportion c…
At 12/minute your not going to be able fire again before someone 20m from you get's in range. Second 80lb is light on the light but useful end of a medieval bow. Also, their arrows where much heaver and less stable in flight than what most people use now days. PS: There is something of an arms race with bows, if you use a 100lb bow and your opponents use 80lb bows you can slaughter them before they get into range. (I…
If that fails, and someone is anywhere near 20m, you drop your bow and a) draw your own hand weapon, or b) more likely - run. Because if you're up against someone whose primary weapon is a sword, they're likely to be better than you and have more/better armour, so your odds are low. On the other hand, if you're up against a billman, your odds are basically zero.
I only put the accuracy for a 20m target because a) that's what we shoot at for practice in my reenactment group, and b) to demonstrate that most people can aim moderately at that distance while shooting quickly - they're not just pinging arrows off in any direction in order to get the rate of fire up.
As a longbow archer, your primary job is to put as many arrows as possible into a large block of men 200m-300m(-400m?) away before they get to the billmen you're protecting (and who are protecting you.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look into the physical fitness of Amish and the less developed world in general. You will also find the answer in any researched history of medieval life. The short answer is that a typical modern person (gamer or no) is much less fit than anybody from the age of melee weapons, let alone knights.
> The short answer is that a typical modern person (gamer or no) is much less fit than anybody from the age of melee weapons, let alone knights. But I don't have smallpox. Or cholera. Or an iodine deficiency, because I live so far from the ocean.
If you want to sword fight "realistically", go out, buy a sword and join a sword-fighting club. Darn, why do people try to solve everything with technology when there is a simple solution in the physical world!? No matter how they dice it or slice it (ah ah), it's not going to end up "realistic" for anyone who has used a sword before.
One of the most interesting games I've ever played was Bushido Blade 2. The best thing about it was realistic vulnerability: get stabbed once and you die (or maybe lose use of an arm). The disappointment was made up for by lots of quick rounds. I always thought it was silly to have games where you'd get shot 20 times and keep fighting exactly the same, just lose some of your energy meter, then suddenly flop over and…
Yeah, my immediate reaction to this is that I just want a real Bushido Blade sequel. The most underrated fighting game of all time IMO.
It was interesting, but not at all fun - to me, it seemed like the equivalent of playing five card stud.