Avatar of Vilageidiotx
  • Last Seen: 3 yrs ago
  • Joined: 12 yrs ago
  • Posts: 4839 (1.07 / day)
  • VMs: 2
  • Username history
    1. Vilageidiotx 12 yrs ago
  • Latest 10 profile visitors:

Status

Recent Statuses

8 yrs ago
Current I RP for the ladies
4 likes
8 yrs ago
#Diapergate #Hugs2018
2 likes
9 yrs ago
I fucking love catfishing
2 likes
9 yrs ago
Every time I insult a certain coworker, i'll take money from their jar. Saving for beer would never be easier!
4 likes
9 yrs ago
The Jungle Book is good.
3 likes

Bio







Most Recent Posts

So far as you are aware of the limitation, everything is peachy.

With crossbows, the main advantage is simplicity. Most cultures that employed mounted archers had them train from the time they were children. Even the best bowman on foot, like the longbowman of England and Wales, required years of training to be effective. A crossbow, on the other hand, can be used by any dumb motherfucker who can look at something and pull a trigger. I know this, because I own a crossbow. My father also happens to own a longbow. Both are modern fiberglass builds, but even then at least the differences between the two styles are noticeable.

If the skilled professional warriors are all doing something else in his culture, then it is possible mounted archers are being recruited from a lower class of riders. If they are not proficient with a bow, they won't be shooting bows from horseback and a crossbow (which doesn't require proficiency) could easily be substituted.
<Snipped quote by The Nexerus>

Juat about to take off, so....

I guess it's the thought that counts.


You lived through the night though, and that is half the battle.
It would have happened in the declining period of the Visha, probably a century or so before they fell.

And regarding the cavalry, they would still have the advantage of maneuverability that comes with riding a horse. Plus, they could easily also have a melee weapon with them. I could see crossbow horsemen functioning as a sort of skirmishing force.
That tactics would be different. There are bonuses to the crossbow, namely that it is easy to use and can cut through armor fairly efficiently. But to properly use a crossbow on horseback, you'd have to slow down... I think. Perhaps the Mongolians could have pulled it off at full gallop... I have heard their best riders could hang off the side of their horses so that the horse's body was between them and their enemies, where they would return fire from underneath their horse's chin. Those guys knew what they were doing.

Still, the imagine I can't help but have of mounted crossbowman is as a mounted firing line. It's a legitimate tactic, just not the one people assume when they think of horse archers.
Don't fly over Ukraine.


Or Malaysia.
>Gets hype for negative energy "Chicago Pile" moment
>OP links to EM drive article I've read fifteen times
>Hype dies like Captain Kirk in Generations

Eh. At least we've got this thing that'll take us to the moon 24 times faster than the fastest thing a human ever rode in.

Still takes over four years to get to Centauri.

Not good enough.


That's pretty impressive when you consider that Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe took three years.
The Red Salon is where communists get their beards permed.
Aaron hasn't actually sat down and read a post since Christmas.

Also. just a short note regarding the crossbows, the Chinese crossbow is weak so remember that. I could see potentially having a complex crank system that allowed heavier crossbows to be used on horseback, but it wouldn't look like the Mongols.
A low powered cross bow could be loaded from horseback, but those would be shittier than regular bows.

And elephants could live in the north. There is no reason it couldn't happen.
Gunpowder is pretty common. It's just a mix of sulfur, charcoal, and saltpeter (which is nitrogen something). Gunpowder has been used for quite a long time, it just remained limited until somebody figured out the gun.
© 2007-2026
BBCode Cheatsheet