Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:So...many...weapons.....


I'M IN HEAVEN! Only Frazz's here too.

Look again, it ain't heaven you're in boyyyy.

Frazzled wrote:

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:So...many...weapons.....


I'M IN HEAVEN! Only Frazz's here too.

Look again, it ain't heaven you're in boyyyy.

Wait....NOOOOO!!!!! Forgive me god .

sebster wrote:

Wolfstan wrote:Interestly Wellington wished he had access to a longbow regiment at Waterloo as they had a high rate of fire, better range and were more accurate than the muskets he had.

Nah, it was a senior officer, not Wellington himself. And this was probably due to the fact that even then there was a lot of romance about the longbow. It was a great weapon in the right circumstances, when a disorganised enemy meanders uphill towards you, but it also has to be remembered that musket armed troops pulled double duty, as a ranged threat and then as a block of infantry. Archers were purely a ranged threat, so perhaps the better question is whether you want some archers or more cannon.

It depends if they are archers or English archers equipped with tenting equipment.

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Little lord Fauntleroy wrote:So...many...weapons.....


I'M IN HEAVEN! Only Frazz's here too.

Look again, it ain't heaven you're in boyyyy.

Wait....NOOOOO!!!!! Forgive me god .

Yeah, sure, why not.

....I've failed again haven't I?

Let me get this straight. The first firearms took forever to load, were horribly inaccurate and had a chance to blow up in your face but they still retained their popularity long enough to be developed into the super efficient filling machines we have today. Why didn't all those first firearms users throw their hands up in disgust and say "Ah, feth it, where's my crossbow?"

warpcrafter wrote:Let me get this straight. The first firearms took forever to load, were horribly inaccurate and had a chance to blow up in your face but they still retained their popularity long enough to be developed into the super efficient filling machines we have today. Why didn't all those first firearms users throw their hands up in disgust and say "Ah, feth it, where's my crossbow?"

Because as little training a crossbow needed, firearms needed less.

Gwar! wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:Let me get this straight. The first firearms took forever to load, were horribly inaccurate and had a chance to blow up in your face but they still retained their popularity long enough to be developed into the super efficient filling machines we have today. Why didn't all those first firearms users throw their hands up in disgust and say "Ah, feth it, where's my crossbow?"

Because as little training a crossbow needed, firearms needed less.

Do I really even need to say it ?

warpcrafter wrote:Let me get this straight. The first firearms took forever to load, were horribly inaccurate and had a chance to blow up in your face but they still retained their popularity long enough to be developed into the super efficient filling machines we have today. Why didn't all those first firearms users throw their hands up in disgust and say "Ah, feth it, where's my crossbow?"

Many of them did, until the invention of the bayonet made pikes redundant. It should also be remembered that accuracy matters a lot less when you're aiming at the literal equivalent of the broad side of a barn (infantry blocks).

In addition, lead shot is far easier to manufacture than crossbow bolts.

dogma wrote:

warpcrafter wrote:Let me get this straight. The first firearms took forever to load, were horribly inaccurate and had a chance to blow up in your face but they still retained their popularity long enough to be developed into the super efficient filling machines we have today. Why didn't all those first firearms users throw their hands up in disgust and say "Ah, feth it, where's my crossbow?"

Many of them did, until the invention of the bayonet made pikes redundant.

Ok Gwar, Dogma, and Frazzled are in agreement. Spend it now, the world's about to end.
*Training easier
*Many did indeed, or stayed with Pikes et al. I don't know about the Cromwell types by the conquistadores has a real mix of archers, crossbowmen, and arqueberes (spelling wrong I am sure) with most still relying on pikes and HTH weaponry.
*Not just bayonets but non-plug bayonets and flintlock firing mechanisms had to be invented. A plug bayonet literally fit int the barrel so you fired then it became a spear.

Firearms stayed around in a support capacity behind pike lines. They were good against cavalry (bang bang also scares horses) and good in sieges which Europe still had a lot of. But once the flintlock came around it was all over for bows. Even North American Indians preferred flints and particularly rifled muskets vs. their short bows.

Not sure what the change timeline was in the ME.

The Janissaries were enthusiastic users of matchlocks, however, the Ottoman Empire ultimately fell into decline although it continued to give western Europe scares as late as the siege of Vienna in 1683.

The Mamelukes preferred to rely on horse archery and were crushed by Napoleon at the Battle of the Pyramids.

The Ming and later Qing dynasties in China used various gunpowder weapons including matchlocks. The Chinese empire was moribund by the 18th century.

The Japanese were introduced to matchlocks by Dutch traders in the late 16th century and quickly produced their own designs and tactics. After the establishment of the Tokugawa shogunate, the government successfully suppressed gunpowder weapons over a period of decades.

In India, gunpowder was in use in the same kind of timeline as elsewhere and Indian armies contained a mixture of matchlock weapons and artillery. By the mid 18th century they were also hiring European officers to train their men, however French and particularly British forces were able to destroy large Indian armies by a mixture of tactics, discipline and cunning subversion on occasion.

In Europe the transition from pike to shot began in the early 17th century and was completed in the early 18th century.