Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-25606723-20160816004541/@comment-26347028-20160819214521

Aramirtheranger wrote: Maltalidenta Kwuitidherali wrote:

Aramirtheranger wrote:

Maltalidenta Kwuitidherali wrote:

Aramirtheranger wrote: I never claimed mastery, but I do believe I would best her in a duel to the death.

Because to be any good with the things it takes heaps of training, so she either stinks with it or uses most of the time she trains to practice the bow, while her skill in melee is stunted in comparison. And on the other hand, therefore, you are terrible with a crossbow by your own logic. I train with archery, usually two-handed swords, and horse riding. Now, seeing how I usually otherwise only really do stuff to do with school, or debating, I have a fair bit of time on my hands. No, because an arbalest takes very little skill to use. Remember those guys whose video I used to show that medieval plate armor can provide very minimal firearm protection? They actually tested end him rightly recently and concluded that it actually would have been pretty dang effective if you somehow suprised your opponent with it. From a short distance, yes. But we're either talking about so short a distance that I can harm you with melee weapons and the reload is what kills you, or so far away that your lack of skill kills you. As for taking the pommel off, it would be about as similar as picking a random thing up and throwing it - not to mention easier. I can load before I start the fight. You cannot. In fact, your longbow will snap in half if held at full draw for more than a few seconds. Which is why it's simply easier to use an arbalest. Since you have only a few moments before your lethal weapon turns into a string and a pair of sticks to aim. Your muscles will begin trembling from the tension before that happened, making the shot go wide even if you release in time, further reducing the time you have to aim. Whereas I can load mine and leave it loaded for literally days, even though that would be unadvised for safety reasons.

I don't have a crossbow. Also, here's the same type of arbalest I have against a plate cuirass:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=76mbOMFjlu0

So even if your bow could defeat hardened plate (which it can't) I can do the same fucking thing with greater accuracy.

And what's that at the beginning? It's an English arbalest? Oh look, seems your ancestors understood that both have advantages and disadvantages. Something that seems to have escaped the modern English if you're anything to go by. That's a shit longbow if it breaks that easily. Just saying. The fact that you can't keep it loaded is by far counteracted by the fact that it takes about a second to load. Comparative to the stupid amounts required to load a crossbow (hence mechanisms being used), it's not really a stupendous amount for a bow. Hence while, yes, if you overdraw it it will snap, but that's very much not "full" draw. No one is an idiot to do that. You also assume that I cannot deal with the draw of the bow. Also false.

You assume a low power bow, but you tried to suggest that I couldn't draw it properly, and that I was overdrawing. What on Earth are you stipulating I am? An ant who has no idea of anything?

And you certainly do not have any greater accuracy. With any interference, the crossbow is affected so much more that it's silly. Without, it massively depends upon the draw of both. Assuming you can draw it in any reasonable amount of time, I'd say about 220 pounds for the crossbow would be normal, but you probably couldn't load that. Heck, I'm about stretching myself to thirty with the draw weight of my current bow. But one thing I'm not that you would like to claim is innacurate and weak.