Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 1165365" data-attributes="member: 463">Well the level of historical knowledge here is certainly impressive...  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> 1.  The Battle of Stirling in Braveheart is a-historical, the real battle was fought around Stirling Bridge.  Wallace let a chunk of the English knights cross the bridge, then attacked before the army could form up, driving them back into the river.2.The English never lost a major battle in northern France - Crecy, Poitiers, Agincourt were all English victories, largely accredited to the longbowmen.  It was the French knights who insisted on charging and getting pincushioned.  The longbow could penetrate full plate at close range, long range arcing fire generally wouldn't punch through plate armour but would still wound and panic horses.The longbow (English or Mongol composite) obviously had a greater effective range than the shortbow.  Archers used _different sorts of arrows_ at different ranges - eg Mongol horsebow archers in quote above are described as using light arrows from horseback for greater range when skirmishing.  They would be outranged in effective fire by longbow-armed infantry though, so skirmishing vs such would be risky.  Against crossbowmen their greater mobility would be deadly though, they could ride in, fire and retreat far faster than the crossbow can fire, and the crossbow is not accurate at longer ranges.</blockquote>

Verification