Quote:
Originally Posted by Noctifer
Very much appreciated, folks. When I've time, I may try to re-work the scenario a bit (and include slightly higher skill levels so that my two combatants are indeed at that 'competent' level). Admittedly, I'm not really looking for examples in the 20+ range, I'm more thinking about fights between 'normal' folks.
|
You'll probably find that while the archer isn't as badly off, he's still not vastly more effective than the swordsman. This is realistic. Notice how historical battles are settled by melee rather than missiles into the gunpowder era, and that pike or cavalry charges remained a real threat at least until the introduction of cartridge repeaters. There's a reason for that.
Archers that want to reliably beat the same number of melee shock troops need something to keep the range open - a wall, a ditch, a muddy field, to be mounted so they can run away, but something. Standing in place on a featureless plane until the swordsmen reach you is just bad tactics. When the advantage of your weapon is its reach, you should avoid giving it up by letting your foes into close combat.