Subject:
|
Re: Fire when Ready.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.fun
|
Date:
|
Thu, 17 Aug 2000 20:51:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1306 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.fun, James Howse writes:
> Not particularly being a history junkie and being a bit of a lazy git. I'm
> asking a question here that I probably should be able to answer for myself.
>
> Anyway, What are the diffenences between a longbow and a musket in terms of
> range, damage caused, accuracy, ease of use etc.
The chief problem of the longbow was that it took a long time to train a
proficient longbowman. It also wasn't as proficient at penetrating plate armor
as firearms were, but that's not as significant as the training time.
Muskets were deadlier than longbows out to the extent of their range, which was
maybe 100 yards. Beyond that you were lucky to hit a massed group of men,
which says something about its accuracy. Training time greatly favored the
musket (and earlier hand gonnes and arquebuses) - you could train someone to
use it effectively, if not perfectly, in a very short time.
Longbows with chisel-pointed arrowhead could penetrate chainmail out to 100
yards (there was a wide variety of arrow-tips: broadheads produced maximum
damage, but had a harder time penetrating armor). They were effective out to
two hundred yards, with extreme range more like 300. Rate of fire was greatly
in favor of the longbow, which in formation could shoot about 6 times a minute
(it is capable of even faster, but that seemed to be the speed in practice).
Reload times on muskets got better over time, especially with premeasured
cartridges, but I think a volley a minute is in the ballpark.
Longbow advantages: Accuracy, *extremely* better rate of fire, distance.
Musket: Training time, punch. Once you had the socket bayonet, it had melee
power. You can dodge an arrow, catch it on your shield, even knock it aside
with your weapon - you can't do any of that with a bullet. But then, if you
miss, you may not have a second chance if you are out in the open.
>
> It's been pointed out that in Brikwars the comparison comes down in favour of
> the longbow. If that's accurate to history, why the switch to gunpowder?
The longbow never really caught on outside of the British Isles in Europe for a
variety of reasons. In England they just died out gradually over time simply
through disuse: who wanted to spend all that time practicing?
>
> Some Brikwars stats
> LongBow (and quiver) TL:2, CP:3, Range:12", UR:5, Damage:1d6+2
> Musket TL:3, CP:5, Range:12", UR:5, Damage:1d6(slow)
>
> James (who can't think of a tagline at this hour...)
Dunno what the UR stands for. I'd increase the LB range, but decrease the
damage done at long range. Damage seems low for the musket. Rate of fire for
either?
Bruce
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Fire when Ready.
|
| Not particularly being a history junkie and being a bit of a lazy git. I'm asking a question here that I probably should be able to answer for myself. Anyway, What are the diffenences between a longbow and a musket in terms of range, damage caused, (...) (24 years ago, 17-Aug-00, to lugnet.fun)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
