11-21-2008, 05:26 AM | #41 | ||||
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
I also believe that a reasonably strong archer will have exercised different muscle groups than a very strong weight lifter. It seems fair to me that the archer could pull a bow more efficiently than the weightlifter. Given that most hobby archers will be at DX+1 or lower (except the exceptionally dedicated ones), this also means that a normal man (ST 10-11) will use a bow of about #45-#75, with the higher numbers being reserved for thsoe who are fit and practise a lot. Quote:
Quote:
Question, what difference would composite bows make here? Enough for a +1 damage over a yew longbow? Another question, what if we postulate fantasy materials that are lighter, springier and better? Do we eke out more damage or are the limitations not related to the material used? Quote:
If we are not going to monkey about with that, we'd probably want to benchmark bow damage at ST 10 level and accept that high ST will give unrealistic results. Otherwise bows are artificially weaker than melee weapons, which monkeys with relative weapon power.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
||||
11-21-2008, 05:55 AM | #42 | ||||
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
For example, according to the rules as written, it takes 4 seconds to load a crossbow. This is true, for the lighest hunting crossbows. But such crossbows can't reach the range or the damage given for the GURPS crossbow. A more realistic assessment for a war crossbow would be 8 seconds or more. And the Crossbow in Basic is evidently supposed to be a TL2 selfbow. Everyone who is anyone at TL3 will be using the more efficient and powerful Composite Crossbow. Let's look a professional crossbowman. Crossbow at DX+2, Crossbow Finesse Perk and ST 11 wouldn't be out of place, would it? He can fire his crossbow at a rate of 10-12 times a minute (equivalent to historical bows and more than twice as fast as the most optimistic estimates for historical war crossbows). He inflicts 1d+5 imp damage, which reliably penetrates plate armour and puts most lightly armoured foes down. His 1/2D range is 325 yards, which means that he can penetrate plate at over 300 yards. His maximum effective range is 450 yards. But most jarring of all, his Acc is 4. That's right, any crossbow, whether TL2, TL3 or TL4 has a better Acc than a Baker Rifle. Even without effective sights, mind you. Do we really believe that at a 300 yards range, it's equally difficult to hit a target with an M4 carbine and a historical crossbow? And that if the bullet hits, it's going to do an average of 16 points of damage against an unarmoured person vs. the crossbow's 17? Quote:
The problem with the GURPS stats is that even a ST 11 soldier given a few lessons on how to use a Bow (1 point for a DX-1 level or a skill level of 9) will usually be more effective with a Composite Bow than any kind of musket or rifle before the 19th century. And the same applies with crossbows. Quote:
Quote:
;)
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
||||
11-21-2008, 07:29 AM | #43 | |||||
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Problems with bows --
Quote:
With aiming, a skilled crossbowman goes down to the 10-12 shots per minute mentioned above. Still too high, in my opinion. Quote:
Quote:
That aspect, at least, is accurate enough in GURPS. As long as you assume that most medieval crossbows were steel or composite and cost $950 or more. The Basic Set crossbow is obviously a self-bow. Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
|||||
11-21-2008, 08:13 AM | #44 |
Join Date: Nov 2006
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Well I think denying an enemy the use of a shield is enough justification to use gunpowder weapons instead of crossbows.
|
11-21-2008, 08:21 AM | #45 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! Last edited by Icelander; 11-21-2008 at 08:31 AM. |
|
11-21-2008, 08:24 AM | #46 | |
GURPS FAQ Keeper
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
|
|
11-21-2008, 08:31 AM | #47 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
That's more than two times, yes.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
|
11-21-2008, 08:58 AM | #48 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Douglas, regarding the velocity number of 60 m/s, I've found sources (including The Knight and the Blast Furnace) that indicate that 50+ m/s is easily achievable with yew longbows of #75-#80 draw weight. I admit that this is using a 50g war arrow, but a 90g broadhead only slow it down by about 20%. Initial energy would be around 70J-90J.
Shouldn't a #150 yew longbow get more speed? The same experimenters (McEwen et al) got a speed of 62 m/s with a #90 draw weight crossbow firing a modern target bolt. Energy with a 100g bolt would be 192J. Can you spin these into GURPS damages?
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
11-21-2008, 09:25 AM | #49 |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
I was thinking that loading at the speed given in Basic Set would allow a crossbow with a draw strength of 2xBL. Using a stirrup allows up to 4xBL. I suppose that a two-footed stirrup could allow up to 6xBL, but would take more time than a belt-hook and be less comfortable.
Heavier draw weights require mechanical aids, such as the belt hook and stirrup. Those would allow 6xBL. A two-footed stirrup and a hook would possibly allow 8xBL and a goat's foot lever would probably reach the same. That means that a ST 11 professional soldier can draw a war crossbow of #192, if he has the Crossbow Finesse Perk he reaches #272 and the strongest soldiers (ST 16 + Crossbow Finesse) were probably around #520. I think that crossbows of #150 draw weight were historically used by Genoese mercenaries, but that might have something to do with them wanting to be able to draw them by hand. I'm having trouble finding good sources on Genoese crossbows. Testing was done on a #1200 model, but that's hardly a battlefield weapon. A cranequin should probably be rated independently of the users ST, but perhaps the speed which the user can load is dependent on some combination of ST and skill. The windlass isn't really ST-dependent.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! Last edited by Icelander; 11-21-2008 at 11:54 AM. |
11-21-2008, 09:47 AM | #50 | |
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Not in your time zone:D
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
You still need to find ST+1 recruits for bow use. Muskets and Crossbows don't require exceptionally strong recruits. They take half the time to train to a given standard. I'd take the RAW Bow stats as correct. About the only change I'd make is finding a way to handle the difference between arrow heads; target, broad, bowel-raker, blunt, etc. Muskets are powerful enough and they weren't renowned for accuracy. We do, however, have tales of accurate archery/ crossbow shooting. Time was, I could put an arrow in the cup at 50 yards with a borrowed practice bow and used target arrow while using a pin and cellotape for sights. Muskets were deemed remarkably accurate if they could hit a man-sized target at 100 yards. Perhaps you're over-rating powder and under-rating muscles?
__________________
"Sanity is a bourgeois meme." Exegeek PS sorry I'm a Parthian shootist: shiftwork + out of country = not here when you are:/ It's all in the reflexes |
|
Tags |
bow, crossbow, low-tech, missile weapons |
|
|