Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
hmmm Traditionally long bows are taller then the bowmen and require around and over 45kgs of pull! Longbows could pump out 6 shots per 1 crossbow shot, had more range and were more powerful. Why use a crossbow? because you don't need to be skilled! just point and shoot! A Proffessional longbowen could pick out enemy knights, shooting them in the face from extreme distances!

the point of all this? why are crossbows better in warhammer? and why are longbows so useless?! general oppinions and thoughts appriciated
 

·
Archmagos
Joined
·
904 Posts
I suppose it could just represent what you said about the crossbow not requiring much skill. Maybe the majority of the bow-users just aren't that competent, so they can't use the bow as effectively as the crossbow. Its kind of like if someone tried using a rapier for cutting instead of thrusting.

I think its also because GW's rules just aren't very realistic, yet somehow work; much like their prices.
 

·
Sparta!
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
It isn't realistic at all - for example Longbows should have a higher strength than a short bow due to the increased draw and power.
Personally I would like to see Longbows be able to fire in 2 ranks - anyone remember the 5th Ed High Elf Rules? Or something akin to the volley rule from LotR. Or maybe make it mulitple shot x2. I don't think that any of these will unbalance the game and may actually see the inclusion of bows in armies where they have a choice between crossbows and normal bows.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
I suppose it could just represent what you said about the crossbow not requiring much skill. Maybe the majority of the bow-users just aren't that competent, so they can't use the bow as effectively as the crossbow. Its kind of like if someone tried using a rapier for cutting instead of thrusting.

I think its also because GW's rules just aren't very realistic, yet somehow work; much like their prices.
yeah that kindove makes sense, accuracy would be much harder with a longbow but they should be at least strength 4, i know it would throw the game out but i just find high elf archers so useless, ROFL gamesworkshop is obviously charging the right price, if they wern't, no1 would be buying anyhting....:rofl

High elf Bowmen have no appeal, DE crossbowmen rock cuz of there multiple shot rule. thoughts on this as well ;Y
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 · (Edited)
It isn't realistic at all - for example Longbows should have a higher strength than a short bow due to the increased draw and power.
Personally I would like to see Longbows be able to fire in 2 ranks - anyone remember the 5th Ed High Elf Rules? Or something akin to the volley rule from LotR. Or maybe make it mulitple shot x2. I don't think that any of these will unbalance the game and may actually see the inclusion of bows in armies where they have a choice between crossbows and normal bows.
8XEXCELLENT! thats exactly what i think! shooting in two ranks would make sense or being able to shoot over friendley units due to arced fire (doubt this would be much of an improvement):? oooo -thinks of some house rules-

also this volley rule from LotR.... care to explain *very interested*?
 

·
Sparta!
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
Don't really know much about the LotR volley rule other than what was in a WD a while back, but I do remember the old High Elf citizen levy rule. Thing that got me was when GW finally released HE archers you could rank up, they ditch the rule. It really does just make you shake your head at the sheer idiocy of it - it's as if the rules development have no contact with the model designers and they just lock themselves up in a little room where the rest of the world can't come in...hang on a second, i might be on to something here....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
lol yeah thats pritty stupid, whats even worse, THE DESIGHNERS DON'T EVEN GIVE YOU ENOUGH LEGS FOR ONE RANK!!!!
 

·
By the Silver Sword!
Joined
·
713 Posts
*Shudders*
You don't fire a bow. There is no fire involved in the shooting process. You shoot a bow.

Persoanlly I like the rules for bows/crossbows in Warhammer. Nice and simpe without having to flick through the rule book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
419 Posts
The crossbows should have a higer armour piercing value than the bows, rulewise... (Pardon me for not knowing the full rules for WH Fantasy. I haven't played it in years...)
 

·
Drills baby.
Joined
·
6,481 Posts
It isn't realistic at all - for example Longbows should have a higher strength than a short bow due to the increased draw and power.
Personally I would like to see Longbows be able to fire in 2 ranks - anyone remember the 5th Ed High Elf Rules? Or something akin to the volley rule from LotR. Or maybe make it mulitple shot x2. I don't think that any of these will unbalance the game and may actually see the inclusion of bows in armies where they have a choice between crossbows and normal bows.
Yeah that wouldn't be unbalanced. Not at all. My Wood Elves would find it pretty hilarous really. I would pump massive ammounts of arrows that hit good. And then we are not mentioning Brettonian Bowmen! They would truly block out the skies with arrows!

[/sarcasm]

First, you underestimate the humble longbow. Second, your logic fails when you compare to reality. It is a flawed argument.

Longbows have S3 to balance them. S4 would be insane on a weapon with that range! Brettonian Bowmen are, like, 5-6 points a model and come with a longbow. Fire in 2 ranks and S4 would be insane when you can field 50-60 of them at harly no point cost at all.

And that's its advantage over crossbows, the range. And move and shoot (you cannot move and shoot with crossbows).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Yeah that wouldn't be unbalanced. Not at all. My Wood Elves would find it pretty hilarous really. I would pump massive ammounts of arrows that hit good. And then we are not mentioning Brettonian Bowmen! They would truly block out the skies with arrows!

[/sarcasm]

First, you underestimate the humble longbow. Second, your logic fails when you compare to reality. It is a flawed argument.

Longbows have S3 to balance them. S4 would be insane on a weapon with that range! Brettonian Bowmen are, like, 5-6 points a model and come with a longbow. Fire in 2 ranks and S4 would be insane when you can field 50-60 of them at harly no point cost at all.

And that's its advantage over crossbows, the range. And move and shoot (you cannot move and shoot with crossbows).
Yeah we made rules for longbows "reallistic" in some of our house rules, multi shot, st 4 and LOOSE (please use the right word people, its not hard, theres no fire involved unless you're using flaming arrows, in which case the order was release fire) in 2 ranks, 3 if on a hill. The result from playtesting was a need for an increase in points of 5 on high elf longbowmen and I think it was 7 on woodie longbowmen to make it balanced.

We also improved the crossbow and handgun to make them more realistic, giving the crossbow armour piercing, as it should have, and loose in 2-3 ranks as above which was and is equally possible with a crossbow as it is with a longbow. This resulted in a small points increase of around 2 points. The handgun had ST 5, armour piercing, -1 to hit at long range, caused fear when charging a unit with them and only required 10% kills to cause a panic test (firearms being terrifying when they were used early on). Again this caused around a 3 point increase. We did also sod about with the warmachine rules, for example if you are hit by a bolt thrower you are not getting up - increased st to 8 as standard etc etc.

This did however make ranged weapons more cheesey than a block of edam made in a sandwich with 2 slices of mature english cheddar replacing the bread. Basically although we made it realistic, we effectively broke the game, making it vey little fun to play, as we ended up just trading fire across the board and keeping what few hand to hand troops we had (they basically weren't worth the points) out of range or behind cover. Imagine this, how fun would it be to play a gunline - with no magic, against another gunline, also with no magic? Not much I can tell you.

Basically, although its as reallistic as a Bond film, the warhammer system works, Ranged units are not gamebreaking, their effects are balanced, because if they were realistic, trust me, its no fun.
 

·
RAWR! KROXIGOR!!
Joined
·
1,935 Posts
And that's its advantage over crossbows, the range. And move and shoot (you cannot move and shoot with crossbows).
Thing is, Longbows are probably the one ranged weapon that you definitely CANNOT shoot while moving in real life. You could move and fire a crossbow or a musket however (albeit difficutly, especially while reloading).
 

·
Sparta!
Joined
·
1,438 Posts
Camel - I never suggested making Long Bows s4 and I don't want to. Crossbows are s4 for a reason, I was just pointing out that your average longbow does more damage than your average short bow - especially at close range.
The point I made was that it wouldn't overly unbalance the game if bowmen were allowed to shoot in two ranks so please try to read the entire post before flying off the handle.
Sure, a small points increase could be justified for this rule, I don't deny that. My Wood Elves would love the 2 ranks thing as well, meaning that I would have more manouverable units. So would my bretts, and my mates high elves as well so I really don't understand your sarcasm on this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Camel - I never suggested making Long Bows s4 and I don't want to. Crossbows are s4 for a reason, I was just pointing out that your average longbow does more damage than your average short bow - especially at close range.
The point I made was that it wouldn't overly unbalance the game if bowmen were allowed to shoot in two ranks so please try to read the entire post before flying off the handle.
Sure, a small points increase could be justified for this rule, I don't deny that. My Wood Elves would love the 2 ranks thing as well, meaning that I would have more manouverable units. So would my bretts, and my mates high elves as well so I really don't understand your sarcasm on this one.
It would be a bit of an increase yeah, in the playtesting we did for our house rules as I mentioned above, you are effectively maintaining maximum fire output without the vulnerability of having a thin line, I don't think it would break the rules if there was a points increase of 2-3 points depending on the troop type.

However, crossbows and hanguns in history were fired in more than one rank as well, front rank kneels second rank standing for handguns, and crossbows can be loosed in exactly the same fashion as Longbows. So do you think those rules should be applied to them as well?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 · (Edited)
"Originally Posted by Da Mighty Camel
Yeah that wouldn't be unbalanced. Not at all. My Wood Elves would find it pretty hilarous really. I would pump massive ammounts of arrows that hit good. And then we are not mentioning Brettonian Bowmen! They would truly block out the skies with arrows!

[/sarcasm]

First, you underestimate the humble longbow. Second, your logic fails when you compare to reality. It is a flawed argument.

Longbows have S3 to balance them. S4 would be insane on a weapon with that range! Brettonian Bowmen are, like, 5-6 points a model and come with a longbow. Fire in 2 ranks and S4 would be insane when you can field 50-60 of them at harly no point cost at all.

And that's its advantage over crossbows, the range. And move and shoot (you cannot move and shoot with crossbows)."
whoah whoah whoah pardon me but i dont realy see any1 else getting quite that aggressive about it, sorry if i miss read you as this is over the net, try to re-word your arguments so they seem friendlier. As i said earlier it would unbalance the game, but obviously you would have to increase point costs of the units that are benefiting. historicly long bows where better at piercing armour than crossbows, crossbows only advantage was that a peasant could fire them....no real training needed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
yeah i aggree with Kroxigor, makes allot of sense, sept one thing, crossbows need to be wound up, placed noise down winded and then fired, takes alot of time.... bowmen, runs, aims fire -shugs- just a thought
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
356 Posts
I was discussing firing past friendly targets to some poeple who play FB. I don't see why Longbows cant do it as the path of an arrow arcs in its flight. Longbows are powerful it's true, but crossbows are more so, and aimed properley they are just as accurate as longbows. In medieval times the church banned the use of the crossbow for much the same reason as the samurai stopped using rifles, but because they were so popular they made a comeback as people kept using them. Crossbows were useful because of their high power and ability to punch through the breastplates of armoured knights. They required little skill to use and could be kept strung for extended periods of time withotu lsing their strength unlike recurve bows. Plus because of their extended range crossbows were also useful in killing men on walls from a distance that, in many cases, couldn't be equalled by the archers on the walls. Also because of their compact size and horizontal arms, they could be fired from a hiding position with out having to stand up. Longbows are better than shortbows, but (and I prefer using bows to crossbows myself) crossbows have them beat in every way except for loose rate and arcing fire. There was even a repeating crossbow inveted by the chinese that could at least match a bow's loose rate.

Does the WFB world make use of arbalests? Their stats would be incredible.
 

·
Bearded Ninja
Joined
·
2,678 Posts
on a side note the difference in rate of fire is a lot less than it seems. on a certain documentary series (weapons of war i think it was) they tested the two weapons against each other. the longbow made about 6 shots while the chap with th crossbow made 4. (100 years war period designs)

why are longbows S3? Balance. Though we don't think that GW is even capable of this IT DOES exist and isn't a myth thrown around by certain members ;)

i mean... the longbow has several rather awesome advantages over the crossbow in wfb. the biggest of all its move and shoot. The other one is that there are no crossbow skirmishers in wfb, while there are plenty of longbow ones.

the overall power of the longbow is pretty inferior compared to the crossbow too, putting it in the same league as the crossbow is foolish at best. Longbows beat knights historically by killing the horses after all ;)

Besides, in the long run only elves and bretonians would really get anything from stronger longbows
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
hmm could points, but your talking about bows not long bows right? long bows where incredible! i have a old timer up my street who gave me a book on warfare, all info on this stuff in there, summary was, long bows where faster, more powerful and shot further...
 

·
RAWR! KROXIGOR!!
Joined
·
1,935 Posts
I am happy with S3 Longbows (unrealistic but understandable). What I don't get is how the butt of an Imperial Guardsmen's rifle is as strong as the shot it fires (sorry to use a 40k example) and how the armour of Elves is light and the armour of Chaos is InSaNe (extra defense is not very 'chaosy' and is most certainly 'unkhorne like', and ELVES can't make armour better then Humans?).
 
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top