12-05-2012, 04:30 AM | #1 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
[MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
Does anyone have an idea, preferably backed up with historical sources of some sort, on the mechanics of employing missile weapons from behind your own formations?
Long-range archery involves some degree of arcing fire, of course, but I understand that it is far less dramatic than the layman might imagine at first guess. And in any case, the basic assumption of GURPS ranged combat rules is that the shooter can see his target, even when that target may be a section of the battlefield and not an individual enemy. Obviously, without the benefit of standard drills and trained teamwork between the parties, anyone standing between the archer and his target will get in the way to some extent. On the other hand, some archers were historically trained to stand in more one file, which implies that keeping out of each other's way while is possible to some extent. How many files of his own side can an archer reasonably shoot around without a penalty to hit? None? One? Two? More? When his own side partially shields the enemy from an archer's view, what are the effects on his Perception and Bow skill? A flat penalty per extra file? A random penalty, in line with TS Time of Flight rules? A miss becomes a hit on an ally? A combination of the above? Something else? Even a slight arc would mean that even if visual contact with the target was maintained through friendly formations, the flight of the arrow could be safely over the heads of the men in those files. If battlefield archery was ever used in such a seemingly risky manner, this would probably be the reason why. Do any posters know of historical tactics that relied on archers shooting either while deployed in multiple files of their own or while stationed behind friendly units? Obviously, elevated ground would have enabled this, but did it ever happen on more-or-less level ground? And what does the release angle look like when shooting 90-lb+ warbows at formation targets at 200-300 yds or so? Does it differ dramatically for 60-lb Hun horsebows or 130-lb reflex bows? Even if the risk of hitting one's own men was slight, nevertheless, at some point, the dense files of his own men must become an insurmountable obstacle to vision, if nothing else. At that point, indirect archery would have been possible, through the use of spotters or just pre-arranged drill to target an area. Do we have historical records of this ever happening? What about plunging shots? Would societies that did not employ plunging shots in warfare also be unfamiliar with similarily indirect, if less pronounced parabolic shooting methods?
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
12-05-2012, 04:35 AM | #2 |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
It doesn't seem to happen all that often. Usually archers are deployed on the wings or brought forward to shoot a few volleys before retreating back behind the other troops.
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting. |
12-05-2012, 04:54 AM | #3 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
Quote:
Or do you merely consider such formations as cases where the archers are unable to affect the battle, with the generals either realising this and keeping them in reserve or being ignorant of it and believing them to be contributing in this way? Edit: I think that the fact that archers were routinely exposed in the front line throughout history proves that indirect archery is nowhere near as effective as direct shooting, but that does not rule out the possibility of shooting from behind a screen of infantry, albeit at reduced efficiency.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! Last edited by Icelander; 12-05-2012 at 05:03 AM. |
|
12-05-2012, 05:35 AM | #4 |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
I wouldn't pay any attention to Gabriel and Metz. What source does Goldsworthy cite?
__________________
Compact Castles gives the gamer an instant portfolio of genuine, real-world castle floorplans to use in any historical, low-tech, or fantasy game setting. |
12-05-2012, 06:10 AM | #5 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
Quote:
In any case, plenty of historians speculatively array ancient armies in ways that would place the archers behind a line of their own infantry or cavalry. I'm wondering if these are mistakes by men who haven't enough knowledge of archery or if this is a viable deployement strategy, if ultimately less useful than placing them forward or in the wings when one has steady archers who can be trusted to fall back without disorder.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
|
12-05-2012, 07:44 AM | #6 |
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Albuquerque
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
This is an interesting question and one that I would like to know about. I'd imagine that the "interference" of friendly troops is minimal with proper spacing and distancing between files, however much that is... And the distance to target would be a significant factor. I'm not an expert, but an arc of 15 degrees would allow for some significant distance while avoiding several of your friendlies' heads/bodies. Also, travel time of the projectile would make things difficult if you are shooting into a battle at a significant distance... maybe the 1/2d distance for any given bow forces that "you might hit a friend" bit. (I'd like that... stupid arrows...)
Most my my knowledge is from reading historical fictions, but usually the authors give some penchant towards a sliver of accuracy. |
12-05-2012, 08:49 AM | #7 |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Central Europe
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
The short answer is that we don't know, because to the best of my knowledge nobody has ever assembled a few dozen archers, a few dozen javelineers, and a few dozen hoplites, experimented, and published the results. I think it is likely that a lot of shooting and throwing over a line of heavy infantry was basically unaimed
A modest slope could make this much more practical; that happened during the Athenian civil war of 403 BCE.
__________________
"It is easier to banish a habit of thought than a piece of knowledge." H. Beam Piper This forum got less aggravating when I started using the ignore feature |
12-05-2012, 09:22 AM | #8 | |
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lawrence, KS
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
Quote:
Bill Stoddard |
|
12-05-2012, 09:22 AM | #9 |
Hero of Democracy
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
of course, using javelins instead of arrows makes the arc much more managable, and when you're using it in the heavy formation tactics the greeks and romans were so fond of, its also a lot more effective. We know for a fact that the romans used such tactics, but they used spears, not bows.
__________________
Be helpful, not pedantic Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog Check out the PbP forum! If you don't see a game you'd like, ask me about making one! |
12-05-2012, 09:27 AM | #10 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
|
Re: [MA/LT/LTC2/TS] Battlefield Archery and Formations
This is a very interesting question. I'll be interested to see how this conversation develops.
|
Tags |
archery, low-tech, mass combat |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|