11-20-2008, 06:41 PM | #31 | ||||
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
Quote:
Net/net, though, once you've spent the points in archery, presumably that's worth something as you say. Quote:
From this, using bullet impact formulae I derived in my article on GURPS bullet damage in Pyramid, I can calculate the points of armor a projectile of certain cross section and energy would penetrate. For a "muzzle velocity" of 60m/s and a weight of 60g, and a 1cm diameter shaft, you get about 3.8pts (1d) calculated penetration. This is complicated by the arrowhead, which has a MUCH lower cross section than the shaft, but even a cross-sectional area more accurately calculated (say, a trapezoid 4mm at its thickest and 30mm wide as a broadhead point) won't be less than about half that of the shaft, which only changes damage by 10% higher. (3.8pts goes to 4.2pts). What MIGHT drive that number higher is if the arrowheads were hardened or forged or something much harder than the jacketed lead or mild steel my model was built around. That would usually add an armor divisor...with good steel (semi-armor piercing) usually being worth a 1.25 to 1.5 armor divisor. That would typically make an arrow from this bow penetrate like 1d+1 (4.5pts) to 2d-1 (6.3pts). Given how much oomph I think we can all agree is required for a draw of 180-200lbs, having THAT bow eke out no more than 2d damage as a "ST20 bow" upper end would be fairly OK. That's thr or thr+1 using the ST table AS IS. But, it also requires the assumption of hard arrowheads and smaller cross section...which frankly ain't that bad. Crossbows, apparently, have the benefit of not requiring so many points to eke out that same damage. Quote:
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon |
||||
11-20-2008, 06:45 PM | #32 | |
Doctor of GURPS Ballistics
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Lakeville, MN
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
Yep. Franklin, 1776.
__________________
My blog:Gaming Ballistic, LLC My Store: Gaming Ballistic on Shopify My Patreon: Gaming Ballistic on Patreon |
|
11-20-2008, 08:07 PM | #33 |
Join Date: May 2007
|
Problems with bows --
GURPS should not give a heavy crossbow 25 shots per minute. A light crossbow (no more draw weight than a small bow) perhaps -- but there wouldn't be much aiming.
As a number of sources, including the Royal Ordnance Museum (IIRC -- it was British gov't facility) have noted, longbows will not penetrate decently-made plate armor from c. 1450 on. Said outfit made repops of both bow & armor, (actually, armour, being British) fired A at B at a range of less than 10 meters, and arrows bounced without so much as denting the surface. I've seen the film; plate existed for a reason. Heavy crossbows could -- but they were problematic. If you're holding a 1500 pound draw weight any flaw in the metal can & will be fatal. At least one monarch, a king of Scotland, died in a hunting accident when his crossbow went SPROING! and inflicted heavy injury. In some ways a heavy (c. 1500# draw) crossbow is a more difficult manufacturing task than a musket. While the latter has to survive more peak pressure, no part of it has to be terribly hard AND have great tensile strength. The tips of the crossbow and the faces of the trigger mechanism thereof do require this. If the tips are soft, the bow-wire will cut into them and (if you're lucky) disable the crossbow. If you're not lucky the tip will separate. Given the geometry of the crossbow, if you're aiming it at the time a wire lash will hit you driven by c. 750# (a single bow-limb). Not good. And, as stated, it was easier to train a man to use a musket than a longbow. As far as accuracy, the Knights of St. John at Malta (1565 CE) noted that Turkish musketeers were inflicting hits on single targets (human) at over 100 yards in the siege of Fort St. Elmo. While they may no have been accurate by our standards they were accurate enough to be a problem. |
11-20-2008, 09:42 PM | #34 | |
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Charlotte, North Caroline, United States of America, Earth?
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
__________________
Hydration is key |
|
11-20-2008, 10:16 PM | #35 |
Join Date: Oct 2005
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Crossbows don't refuse to fire when wet, unlike black powder. So they might have had a certain attraction to a naval expedition. As well, the raw materials for additional quarrels could be reasonably be trusted to be found all over the world; I could see an expedition planner worried about easily obtaining the raw materials for black powder in Terra Incognita.
|
11-20-2008, 11:38 PM | #36 | |
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Philippines, Makati
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
I've read up and discussed with some friends the studies about the bow, the xbow and the muskets (even the handgonnes). A friend (who lurks these forums) as told me about some calculations made to see how these two technologies would interact. From his anecdote a program running a simulation of 13C longbowmen of 5,000 against an equal no. of Napoleonic Riflemen. Depending on the circumstance they can defeat each other quite soundly. Bottomline is basically the morale, the first to receive a terrible loss would be the loser. Stat-wise, I find them correct. It is the context of what happens when the typically bad circumstances in war that alter what is theoretically probably from what will happen. Food for thought. My friend who is reading up on many Chinese texts about their combined arms tactics found that they employed the Rotating Massed Volley Fire with their Heavy Xbows (contrast to the squad firing as quickly as they can, continuously), similar to those employed with early slow loading rifles. Between volleys, they would have archers step up and, with rapid fire, fill in these crucial gaps. An amazing sight IMO, if xbows use matured fully and combined with archery. |
|
11-21-2008, 02:52 AM | #37 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
|
|
11-21-2008, 03:09 AM | #38 | |
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
|
|
11-21-2008, 03:55 AM | #39 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: U.K.
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
__________________
-- Phil Masters My Home Page. My Self-Publications: On Warehouse 23 and On DriveThruRPG. |
|
11-21-2008, 05:10 AM | #40 | |
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
|
Re: Low-Tech Missile Weapon Range and Accuracy
Quote:
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela! |
|
Tags |
bow, crossbow, low-tech, missile weapons |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|