PDA

View Full Version : Slingshot or Crossbow?



Seed1989
07-11-2007, 02:46 AM
Slingshot or Crossbow?

the_assassin_07
07-11-2007, 09:42 AM
1 (8%)
yes http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/351.gifwhoever voted 4 slingshot is 1 crazy disturbed human being

Social_lEnemy
07-11-2007, 09:51 PM
it is far easier and quicker to kill someone with a crossbow, much better for an assassin

assassin_rox
07-11-2007, 10:30 PM
Originally posted by Social_lEnemy:
it is far easier and quicker to kill someone with a crossbow, much better for an assassin I agree..the crossbow also shold have a bladed side...kinda stupid since u have a sword...but might come in handy

Tlepolemus7
07-12-2007, 01:04 AM
yeah, assassin_rox, cause thats historically accurate.

moqqy
07-12-2007, 03:23 AM
Originally posted by assassin_rox:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Social_lEnemy:
it is far easier and quicker to kill someone with a crossbow, much better for an assassin I agree..the crossbow also shold have a bladed side...kinda stupid since u have a sword...but might come in handy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no it doesnt have a bladed side

Agent_of_Persia
07-12-2007, 03:27 AM
Originally posted by Tlepolemus7:
yeah, assassin_rox, cause thats historically accurate.
The E3 trailer atleast, shows him hitting somebody with his crossbow, and i doubt that a wet-sounding thwack would occur if it was blunt. Historical accuracy would take the seat behind gameplay.
Wait.....you...were being sarcastic, right?

Tlepolemus7
07-12-2007, 03:34 AM
Agent, I'm sure you'd know all about wet sounding thwacks, huh?

Bull**** the crossbow has a bladed side and bull**** that would ever be in this game. Historical accuracy was this projects main goal a few years ago and however much they've veered from that goal, it should still be apparent. How exactly would you fit a bladed crossbow into seamless gameplay so far as to put it a step above historical accuracy? It's a stupid idea.

Thumper1980
07-12-2007, 03:57 AM
He just stabs the guy with it.
It has a sort of point at the tip of the bow. It's by no means a blade however.
He didn't die, probably just got wrenched by his clothes or something, cause if you look, you can see him getting up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

moqqy
07-12-2007, 04:20 AM
Originally posted by Thumper1980:
He just stabs the guy with it.
It has a sort of point at the tip of the bow. It's by no means a blade however.
He didn't die, probably just got wrenched by his clothes or something, cause if you look, you can see him getting up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


yepp if you hit someone with your pillow it doesnt turn your pillow into an axe

Tlepolemus7
07-12-2007, 04:22 AM
Originally posted by Thumper1980:
He just stabs the guy with it.
It has a sort of point at the tip of the bow. It's by no means a blade however.
He didn't die, probably just got wrenched by his clothes or something, cause if you look, you can see him getting up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

he gets the end hooked around some poor SOB's neck, and wrenches him forward so he loses his balance. No stabbing involved.

tschlosser
07-12-2007, 06:03 PM
Is there even gonna be a crossbow, becuz in all the gameplay videos, i have never seen someone use the crossbow

davo81
07-12-2007, 07:46 PM
Urm there is no crossbow in the game u have throwing knives instead http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and that first trailer was just a render not real in game quality...

wollbert23
07-12-2007, 08:04 PM
Urm to you too sir.

Tlepolemus7
07-13-2007, 02:10 AM
Jade said there was a crossbow, but she has lied to me before...

/sob

I'll assume that it comes later, when you advance into higher ranking of the assassination corporation

StealthShottz
07-13-2007, 02:37 AM
I lol'd at the slingshot. You'll sling your eye out kid! lol

Really though, why would he have slingshot?

SloppyCracker
07-13-2007, 07:07 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gifI wonder why I would ''shoot'' a stone at my target if I could pierce his head with an arrow Hmm...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif *slings stones towards his neighbours' dog*

Lordgrunty11
07-13-2007, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by davo81:
Urm there is no crossbow in the game u have throwing knives instead http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif and that first trailer was just a render not real in game quality...
Pretty sure he's right, those were throwing knives in the trailer and I haven't heard any official news about a crossbow.

ScytheOfGrim
07-13-2007, 10:09 AM
it really doesnt suit altair, hope they dont put it in the game...

acrocks82
07-13-2007, 10:10 AM
why the heck would u want a slingshot,that would just annoy ur target. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

acrocks82
07-13-2007, 10:11 AM
why would you want a slingshot?it would just annoy ur target.

ScytheOfGrim
07-13-2007, 10:12 AM
trust me rocky, many of us would love to annoy others http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Lordgrunty11
07-13-2007, 10:17 AM
another reason it shouldn't be in there is because if you are chasing your target you could just pull out your crossbow and hit him in the face and not have to chase him (not fun) and like when Talal is standing on the building in the E3 stage demo you could just get him there without chasing at all.

the_assassin_07
07-13-2007, 11:24 AM
I lol'd at the slingshot. You'll sling your eye out kid! lol
Really though, why would he have slingshot?
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
Altair: You will feel the wrath of my mighty slingshot!(fires)
Enemy:*cough*
Altair: Um.........(runs 4 it)

A55A55IN_3RiK
07-13-2007, 12:59 PM
crosbow all the way.
all his other weapons are close range and hand-to-hand combat.
why would you take away altair's only accurate long reange weapon?

Marek86
07-13-2007, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by Tlepolemus7:
Agent, I'm sure you'd know all about wet sounding thwacks, huh?

Bull**** the crossbow has a bladed side and bull**** that would ever be in this game. Historical accuracy was this projects main goal a few years ago and however much they've veered from that goal, it should still be apparent. How exactly would you fit a bladed crossbow into seamless gameplay so far as to put it a step above historical accuracy? It's a stupid idea.

Man you need to chill out, kinda hostile.

trueaim92
07-13-2007, 02:44 PM
definately crossbow.

noobfun
07-13-2007, 02:53 PM
id deffinatley say crossbow

but you guys laughing at the sling and taking the urine out of it do realise its more damaging then a crossbow bolt? in skilled hands almost as acurate (short range 100-150 meters tops), and a hell of a lot faster to re load and fire

TogaLive
07-13-2007, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by Seed1989:
Slingshot or Crossbow?
LOL its not Zelda

Sutcliffe43
07-13-2007, 08:03 PM
Imagine a slingshot in AC. Altair's trying to take out his target at long range and all he manages to do is cause a bruise.

moqqy
07-13-2007, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by Sutcliffe43:
Imagine a slingshot in AC. Altair's trying to take out his target at long range and all he manages to do is cause a bruise.

yeah or imagine him trying to take out a target with his crossbow and just causing a scratch?
"but you guys laughing at the sling and taking the urine out of it do realise its more damaging then a crossbow bolt?"

Sutcliffe43
07-13-2007, 08:12 PM
Uhh, dude, a crossbow is probably the most effective non-incidenary projectile weapon ever made. If someone was hit by a crossbow at a long enough range with sufficent power in the right place, they are dead.

A slingshot is unlikely to kill anyone under any circumstances.

moqqy
07-13-2007, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by Sutcliffe43:
Uhh, dude, a crossbow is probably the most effective non-incidenary projectile weapon ever made. If someone was hit by a crossbow at a long enough range with sufficent power in the right place, they are dead.

A slingshot is unlikely to kill anyone under any circumstances.

well since i dont have any good links atm, ill leave it to noobfun ( and he likes it, weirdo ) to lecture you, however

http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy...es-for-shooting.html (http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy-faces-felony-charges-for-shooting.html)

also a quote of warnings when using slingshot
"Never fire your slingshot in the direction of people or animals. Your slingshot should be treated with the same caution as a deadly weapon. "

also if you can hunt squirrels, rabbits etc, it's really accurate.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.94A.602

Tlepolemus7
07-13-2007, 09:28 PM
hehehe, Marek86. Intratubes is serious business?

I think a slingshot would be stupid for altair too, but some of you guys should know...

Hannibal's army - yeah, you know, the greatest general and most feared army of all time - used slings, and they were ridiculously effective. They were just as deadly as bows in his army.

boogymonster199
07-13-2007, 11:26 PM
its a master assassin, not an african army

its also assassins creed not bart simpson

ScytheOfGrim
07-13-2007, 11:26 PM
Originally posted by noobfun:
id deffinatley say crossbow

but you guys laughing at the sling and taking the urine out of it do realise its more damaging then a crossbow bolt? in skilled hands almost as acurate (short range 100-150 meters tops), and a hell of a lot faster to re load and fire

plus its got infinite ammo http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

you just pick up anything close to a sphere and whack it at your enemies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif(heads included)

but no way, crossbow all the way.

olendvcook
07-13-2007, 11:55 PM
how about neither?

Tatersalad810
07-14-2007, 12:23 AM
s
Originally posted by moqqy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sutcliffe43:
Uhh, dude, a crossbow is probably the most effective non-incidenary projectile weapon ever made. If someone was hit by a crossbow at a long enough range with sufficent power in the right place, they are dead.

A slingshot is unlikely to kill anyone under any circumstances.

well since i dont have any good links atm, ill leave it to noobfun ( and he likes it, weirdo ) to lecture you, however

http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy...es-for-shooting.html (http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy-faces-felony-charges-for-shooting.html)

also a quote of warnings when using slingshot
"Never fire your slingshot in the direction of people or animals. Your slingshot should be treated with the same caution as a deadly weapon. "

also if you can hunt squirrels, rabbits etc, it's really accurate.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.94A.602 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude, A crossbow is WAY more lethal than a slingshot. The chinese proved it and improved it with the multi-shot crossbow.

noobfun
07-14-2007, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by Sutcliffe43:
Uhh, dude, a crossbow is probably the most effective non-incidenary projectile weapon ever made. If someone was hit by a crossbow at a long enough range with sufficent power in the right place, they are dead.

A slingshot is unlikely to kill anyone under any circumstances.

lmfao yes moqqy's right its time for history and basic balistics class

first i need to clear up the differance between a sling and what americans refer to as a sling shot( catapult to give it its real name)

sling shot (american) ~ a Y shaped handel with some form of rubber or elastic conected to the arms with a pouch or cup to load the projectile (were not talking about them)

sling ~ a long length of cord 6-8 feet (rough guess on length) with a small pouch in the middle it is then twirled around extremly fast generating vast ammounts centrafugal force when 1 cord of the sling is released it allows the sling shot(lead balls stones anything you put in it) to fire off in the direction of release changing the centrafugal force in to velocity

sling shot (the real world)~ rounded stones or more usually for military use small lead balls

now on to balistic damage ^_^

the english yew longbow (5'8"-6'6") is easily more powerful then a crossbow of the same era

a cross bow can store more energy but struggles to use that energy into the forward flight of the bolt, the arms are simply to short so much of it is wasted

bows/crossbows cause a penatration wound they go in 1 end and with enough force hopefully comeout the other end (bows tend to do more damage becasue of the wider heads used) if they dont hit a vital spot (suprisingly easy) then it is easily survivable (not including the risk of infection)

if a bolt or arrow fails to penetrate it does little more then leave a bruise which is why the milenesse found a way to make arrow proof armour, they found a way to harden it so that arrows (specifically the undeaftable english longbow men's arrows)would dent but not penetrate. richard the lion heart was hit by a cross bow bolt during the crusades not only did it not kill him he also kept fighting until the battle was won with it sticking out of him.

a sling shot uses blunt force trauma (it can penetrate unarmoured or weak armoured areas and then act similar to a ball shot musket)

if an arrow or bolt hits a shield it will rebound or embed in the shield the only chance of causing injury would be minor pentration straight into the shield arm, a sling shot is like hitting the shield with a sledge hammer it can shatter your arm, against plate armour the same effect its a long distance sledge hammer. it simply causes internal injuries. on the outside a bruise, on the inside organs ruptur and bones brake making it hard to keep fighting after bieng hit

the reason the sling dropped out of favour in battle is simple any idiot can use a bow, nock the arrow aim towards a large group of enemy pull back and let go

the sling takes a lot of skill to use accurately meaning its easier to arm a whole bunch of idiots with bows then find the same number of skilled slingers

TogaLive
07-14-2007, 12:28 AM
Originally posted by moqqy:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Sutcliffe43:
Uhh, dude, a crossbow is probably the most effective non-incidenary projectile weapon ever made. If someone was hit by a crossbow at a long enough range with sufficent power in the right place, they are dead.

A slingshot is unlikely to kill anyone under any circumstances.

well since i dont have any good links atm, ill leave it to noobfun ( and he likes it, weirdo ) to lecture you, however

http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy...es-for-shooting.html (http://tallahassee.com/legacy/special/blogs/2007/02/boy-faces-felony-charges-for-shooting.html)

also a quote of warnings when using slingshot
"Never fire your slingshot in the direction of people or animals. Your slingshot should be treated with the same caution as a deadly weapon. "

also if you can hunt squirrels, rabbits etc, it's really accurate.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9.94A.602 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I used to compete professionally in Archery tournaments in California about a year ago, and I can tell you first hand that a crossbow bolt going 300 FPS is alot more damaging in ANY case then a slingshot which will have a hard time reaching 170-200 FPS. Its hard aerodynamic's and facts, So please give it up.

ScytheOfGrim
07-14-2007, 12:29 AM
dang you people like to wiki. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

after all this, i doubt i'll even throw a rock at someone...

Tlepolemus7
07-14-2007, 12:32 AM
Toga, I don't think anyone said a crossbow was less powerful than a slingshot.

I pointed out that in history, slingshots have been used just as effectively as bows. Never said crossbows. Only point was to stop people from thinking that slingshots are uesless little toys.

TogaLive
07-14-2007, 12:46 AM
Originally posted by Tlepolemus7:
Toga, I don't think anyone said a crossbow was less powerful than a slingshot.

I pointed out that in history, slingshots have been used just as effectively as bows. Never said crossbows. Only point was to stop people from thinking that slingshots are uesless little toys.
I understood that was your point, and not to be repetative, but it would be ignorance telling me to agree with you on the issue of them being used just as effectively as bows, even a yew longbow clocks on average about 30-50 FPS more, thats the difference between a killing shot and a puncture wound. It wasnt crossbows I shot competatively http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.

Tatersalad810
07-14-2007, 01:07 AM
Originally posted by Tlepolemus7:
Toga, I don't think anyone said a crossbow was less powerful than a slingshot.

I pointed out that in history, slingshots have been used just as effectively as bows. Never said crossbows. Only point was to stop people from thinking that slingshots are uesless little toys.

Not exactly true. The Native Americans had some serious bows. One particular tribe had their bows strung so tightly, no European bowman could string them. Those bows delivered MASSIVE damage to just about whatever hit them.

Plus, an arrowhead can be effectively poisoned because it penetrates the skin. A sling or slingshot will mostly bruise the skin instead of penetrate it. Poisoned arrows or crossbow bolts kinda blow slings out of the water.

noobfun
07-14-2007, 03:17 AM
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:

Not exactly true. The Native Americans had some serious bows. One particular tribe had their bows strung so tightly, no European bowman could string them. Those bows delivered MASSIVE damage to just about whatever hit them.

Plus, an arrowhead can be effectively poisoned because it penetrates the skin. A sling or slingshot will mostly bruise the skin instead of penetrate it. Poisoned arrows or crossbow bolts kinda blow slings out of the water.

ok im not sure how many native americans made it to the third crusade ... im guessing not enough to be mentioned by any historic texts

but lets look at them shall we


It has been questioned whether Californians possessed the sling before European contact. Stephen Powers, however, reported it among the remote Mountain Winton during his travels in the early 1870s and wrote that miners before that knew its sting from these Indians. It was reputed more deadly than an arrow and its missile said to have gone farther. The Western Mono mountaineers employed the sling for war. Among the Yokuts, boys hurled the sling as well.

and that bruise your talking about from slings


Soldiers, notwithstanding their defensive armor, are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood.


There is a third type of weapon that sometimes needs to be removed, a leaden bullet or rock or something similar, which breaking through the skin lodges inside in one piece. In all of these cases, the wound needs to be opened a bit wider, and what is inside must be extracted with pincers along the same pathway by which it entered.


Often, against soldiers armoured with helmets, scale coats and mail shirts, smooth stones shot from a sling or staff sling are more dangerous than arrows, since while leaving the limbs intact they inflict a lethal wound, and the enemy dies from the blow of the stone without the loss of any blood'



Vegetius wrote that sling missiles were more effective than arrows against soldiers clothes in leather, since they did not need to penetrate the leather in order to cause bruises. Should the soldier wear no protective clothing, the missile would penetrate the body easily up to a range of about 100 meters. Indeed, Celsius, a medical writer from Greek and roman times, gave detailed instructions in his "De Medicina" on how to remove lead and stone missiles from the bodies of soldiers.

slings can pierce unarmoured skin, but it works best against plate,scale or any rigid armour causing internal injury on an area wider then a very narrow cross bow bolt can damage

and lets face it dipping arrows in poison .. not all that common in medieval warfare



Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.



and the Anglo-Norman army seems always to have included an organised body of slingers; but the use of the sling gradually became obsolete, though it was retained for a long time as a means of amusement and exercise. We have however evidence of its employment in war as late as the end of the fourteenth century

also they seriously favored the cross bow over the long bow because of its ease of training(and the fact they were normans who loved thier crossbows) so english crossbowmen vastly outnumbered english longbowmen during the third crusades

and the muslim contingent used a mix of crossbows and the more favoured turk compound bows

TogaLive
07-14-2007, 12:04 PM
Originally posted by noobfun:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tatersalad810:

Not exactly true. The Native Americans had some serious bows. One particular tribe had their bows strung so tightly, no European bowman could string them. Those bows delivered MASSIVE damage to just about whatever hit them.

Plus, an arrowhead can be effectively poisoned because it penetrates the skin. A sling or slingshot will mostly bruise the skin instead of penetrate it. Poisoned arrows or crossbow bolts kinda blow slings out of the water.

ok im not sure how many native americans made it to the third crusade ... im guessing not enough to be mentioned by any historic texts

but lets look at them shall we


It has been questioned whether Californians possessed the sling before European contact. Stephen Powers, however, reported it among the remote Mountain Winton during his travels in the early 1870s and wrote that miners before that knew its sting from these Indians. It was reputed more deadly than an arrow and its missile said to have gone farther. The Western Mono mountaineers employed the sling for war. Among the Yokuts, boys hurled the sling as well.

and that bruise your talking about from slings


Soldiers, notwithstanding their defensive armor, are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood.


There is a third type of weapon that sometimes needs to be removed, a leaden bullet or rock or something similar, which breaking through the skin lodges inside in one piece. In all of these cases, the wound needs to be opened a bit wider, and what is inside must be extracted with pincers along the same pathway by which it entered.


Often, against soldiers armoured with helmets, scale coats and mail shirts, smooth stones shot from a sling or staff sling are more dangerous than arrows, since while leaving the limbs intact they inflict a lethal wound, and the enemy dies from the blow of the stone without the loss of any blood'



Vegetius wrote that sling missiles were more effective than arrows against soldiers clothes in leather, since they did not need to penetrate the leather in order to cause bruises. Should the soldier wear no protective clothing, the missile would penetrate the body easily up to a range of about 100 meters. Indeed, Celsius, a medical writer from Greek and roman times, gave detailed instructions in his "De Medicina" on how to remove lead and stone missiles from the bodies of soldiers.

slings can pierce unarmoured skin, but it works best against plate,scale or any rigid armour causing internal injury on an area wider then a very narrow cross bow bolt can damage

and lets face it dipping arrows in poison .. not all that common in medieval warfare



Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.



and the Anglo-Norman army seems always to have included an organised body of slingers; but the use of the sling gradually became obsolete, though it was retained for a long time as a means of amusement and exercise. We have however evidence of its employment in war as late as the end of the fourteenth century

also they seriously favored the cross bow over the long bow because of its ease of training(and the fact they were normans who loved thier crossbows) so english crossbowmen vastly outnumbered english longbowmen during the third crusades

and the muslim contingent used a mix of crossbows and the more favoured turk compound bows </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I would like to know where you got your information, and who their sources were because there are several discrepencies (spelling) in that information, not to mention it is extremely bias. For example, of couse slings were used in war, but the use of bows (of any kind) was much more prevelant, and for a reason. As I said, its hard aerodynamic facts that a bow in most cases will easily surpass a sling. All slings were used effectively at were to, as said in your own words,

"are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood. "

In war, few people would care if a body is mangled or not, whether it be in present day or in the crusades. Not to mention I am confident a Yew Long, Elm Long, Crossbow, or even a primitive recurve could outshoot a sling.


Oh and about the armor, an arrow can as well pierce armor, an example being from a crossbow. Not to mention at many professional shoots there is a target called a "steel pig". This target is 1/4 inch steel with a 2'' by 2'' hole cut out of it. Often archers will miss the hole, but not the pig, and end up with an arrow they must break in half because it has pierced the steel.

I suggest future posts which attempt to be so convincing look a bit more at the very information they are posting, and try not to be so biased.

TogaLive
07-14-2007, 02:12 PM
Originally posted by TogaLive:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by noobfun:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tatersalad810:

Not exactly true. The Native Americans had some serious bows. One particular tribe had their bows strung so tightly, no European bowman could string them. Those bows delivered MASSIVE damage to just about whatever hit them.

Plus, an arrowhead can be effectively poisoned because it penetrates the skin. A sling or slingshot will mostly bruise the skin instead of penetrate it. Poisoned arrows or crossbow bolts kinda blow slings out of the water.

ok im not sure how many native americans made it to the third crusade ... im guessing not enough to be mentioned by any historic texts

but lets look at them shall we


It has been questioned whether Californians possessed the sling before European contact. Stephen Powers, however, reported it among the remote Mountain Winton during his travels in the early 1870s and wrote that miners before that knew its sting from these Indians. It was reputed more deadly than an arrow and its missile said to have gone farther. The Western Mono mountaineers employed the sling for war. Among the Yokuts, boys hurled the sling as well.

and that bruise your talking about from slings


Soldiers, notwithstanding their defensive armor, are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood.


There is a third type of weapon that sometimes needs to be removed, a leaden bullet or rock or something similar, which breaking through the skin lodges inside in one piece. In all of these cases, the wound needs to be opened a bit wider, and what is inside must be extracted with pincers along the same pathway by which it entered.


Often, against soldiers armoured with helmets, scale coats and mail shirts, smooth stones shot from a sling or staff sling are more dangerous than arrows, since while leaving the limbs intact they inflict a lethal wound, and the enemy dies from the blow of the stone without the loss of any blood'



Vegetius wrote that sling missiles were more effective than arrows against soldiers clothes in leather, since they did not need to penetrate the leather in order to cause bruises. Should the soldier wear no protective clothing, the missile would penetrate the body easily up to a range of about 100 meters. Indeed, Celsius, a medical writer from Greek and roman times, gave detailed instructions in his "De Medicina" on how to remove lead and stone missiles from the bodies of soldiers.

slings can pierce unarmoured skin, but it works best against plate,scale or any rigid armour causing internal injury on an area wider then a very narrow cross bow bolt can damage

and lets face it dipping arrows in poison .. not all that common in medieval warfare



Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.



and the Anglo-Norman army seems always to have included an organised body of slingers; but the use of the sling gradually became obsolete, though it was retained for a long time as a means of amusement and exercise. We have however evidence of its employment in war as late as the end of the fourteenth century

also they seriously favored the cross bow over the long bow because of its ease of training(and the fact they were normans who loved thier crossbows) so english crossbowmen vastly outnumbered english longbowmen during the third crusades

and the muslim contingent used a mix of crossbows and the more favoured turk compound bows </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I would like to know where you got your information, and who their sources were because there are several discrepencies (spelling) in that information, not to mention it is extremely bias. For example, of couse slings were used in war, but the use of bows (of any kind) was much more prevelant, and for a reason. As I said, its hard aerodynamic facts that a bow in most cases will easily surpass a sling. All slings were used effectively at were to, as said in your own words,

"are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood. "

In war, few people would care if a body is mangled or not, whether it be in present day or in the crusades. Not to mention I am confident a Yew Long, Elm Long, Crossbow, or even a primitive recurve could outshoot a sling.


Oh and about the armor, an arrow can as well pierce armor, an example being from a crossbow. Not to mention at many professional shoots there is a target called a "steel pig". This target is 1/6-1/8 inch steel with a 2'' by 2'' hole cut out of it. Often archers will miss the hole, but not the pig, and end up with an arrow they must break in half because it has pierced the steel.

I suggest future posts which attempt to be so convincing look a bit more at the very information they are posting, and try not to be so biased. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

noobfun
07-14-2007, 02:45 PM
Originally posted by TogaLive:

"are often more annoyed by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood. "

In war, few people would care if a body is mangled or not, whether it be in present day or in the crusades. Not to mention I am confident a Yew Long, Elm Long, Crossbow, or even a primitive recurve could outshoot a sling.



sorry he was a roman general his use of the word annoy doesnt convey the same meaning as we do

arrows can be seen in flight (you have experience in this field so can agree?) this allows you to raise your shield for defence

sling bullets are much harder to see so people just tended to drop dead or badly injured from the impact with no obvious cause other then the noise of the impact, and when your in the front row thats going to casue major morale issues, you cant defend them as all you see is a dot if your lucky so its hard to even judge the direction of travel to protect your self

so given the choice of fighting archer or slinger archers would be chosen




An effective defence ?
A knight in Milanese plate armour of the 15th century
(or an Augsburg armour like the one shown), would be
wearing less weight, having discarded most of his mail.
The plates might be 2 mm thick and rounded in form. It
would be made of medium-carbon steel (0.5%C or
better); it would often be hardened, but for this example
an air-cooled steel will be considered.
An arrow would in effect be striking at 30 deg, and
would need to deliver 230 J in order to defeat this
armour (280 J if padding included), which is unlikely
even for a steel crossbow. So the vendor could
confidently claim to be offering an armour "proof
against the crossbow".
Weapons
Axe, sword (since Bronze Age)60-130J
Longbow arrow (12 th cent)80J
Crossbow bolt (13 th cent)100-200J
Earliest handgun (14 th cent)250J
Developed handguns (mid-15 th cent)500-1000J
Arquebus (1475+)1300J
Musket (1525+)2300J
Energy (J)

from here (http://www.srs.ac.uk/scienceandheritage/presentations/Williams-Tate-Poster1.pdf)



There were those on the late medieval field who would have been confident in amour's abilities, however. By the end of the late 1400's the finest armourers of Europe, most notably in Milan and Germany, where producing armour of such high quality that the wearer would be invulnerable to a hail of arrows whether shot by bow or windlass crossbow.

here (http://www.englishwarbow.com/warbow.html)

the milanese were not only the best armourers of thier time but also highly regarded mercenary heavy cavalry

after facing the longbow while in service of the french they realised the plate they were wearing needed to be better so they invented arrow proof armour it would basically dent the plate but not pierce enough to do any harm



ill look up the greek and roman generals names when i have a chance


Vegetius, a Roman writer in the late 4th century, observed in his famous Epitoma Rei Militaris:

Soldiers, despite their defensive armor, are often more aggravated by the round stones from the sling than by all the arrows of the enemy. Stones kill without mangling the body, and the contusion is mortal without loss of blood.


Contemporary figures confirm this, including Celsus, a Roman medical writer from the 1st century B.C.. He describes in his De Medicina that:

...there is a third type of [projectile] that sometimes needs to be removed, a leaden bullet or rock or something similar, which breaking through the skin lodges inside in one piece. In all of these cases, the wound needs to be opened a bit wider, and what is inside must be extracted with pincers along the same pathway by which it entered.

they have the names and dates in there

www.slinging.org (http://www.slinging.org/index.html) has several historical guides and articles

anyone own a copy of the guiness book of world records?

just wondering what the distance records were for bows and slings. the sling record back in the 80's was 600m+

Tatersalad810
07-15-2007, 12:16 AM
You do know that the weapons advanced as the armor advanced too? There are arrows that can today pierce almost any armor aside from this juggernaut like armor the greeks invented. I saw it on the History Channel so it's not bull.

When arrows penetrate the skin, they tend to cause much more damage than a stone due to the shape of the arrowhead. And poisoning arrows was common for assassinations. Not open warfare.

What the hell are you talking about when you say Native Americans and crusades? They were on OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE WORLD. Plus we don't know much about the Navites seeing how those early Spanish, English and Portugese *******s burned a lot of the records.

quote:
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.

Dude, I didn't even post that!

Here is why the bow/crossbow is better than the sling. It's easier to master than the sling.

Oh, and about that poisoning thing, when the chinese invented their rapid firing crossbow, THEY POISONED THE ARROWS! Why? Due to the construction of it the bolts would barely be able to pierce the armor and skin, so poisoning all the bolts before loading them into the magazine was common. It was beyond simple, any ****** peasant could use it with deadly results, therefore it's better than a sling or slingshot. (Another History channel special, a couple of days ago too.)

noobfun
07-15-2007, 05:51 AM
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:
You do know that the weapons advanced as the armor advanced too? There are arrows that can today pierce almost any armor aside from this juggernaut like armor the greeks invented. I saw it on the History Channel so it's not bull.

When arrows penetrate the skin, they tend to cause much more damage than a stone due to the shape of the arrowhead. And poisoning arrows was common for assassinations. Not open warfare. yes it will, but the point is a sling doent need to penetrate to do damage, it can hit your armour and kill you without trying to penetrate a large lump of metal, also you dont seem familiar with sling shot for warfare known as sling bullets made of sun baked clay or more normally metal

roman archers were trained with the maximum distance of target bieng 180 meters, roman slingers were trained with a maximum distance of 220 meters

an average sling bullet has the same mass as an arrow but a fraction of the surface area meaning inflight air drag effected it much less meaning it carried more of its force to strike the target then an arrow would


What the hell are you talking about when you say Native Americans and crusades? They were on OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE WORLD. Plus we don't know much about the Navites seeing how those early Spanish, English and Portugese *******s burned a lot of the records.

i didnt bring it up, i pointed out that they wernt at the crusades, and native americans wernt well known for bieng great librarians, i may be wrong but they didnt have a complex writting system like the aztecs/incas did of middle south america, and those accounts of bieng attacked by slings are from recentish history of america


quote:
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.

Dude, I didn't even post that!

my appologies i put your name not togalive by mistake


Here is why the bow/crossbow is better than the sling. It's easier to master than the sling.

Oh, and about that poisoning thing, when the chinese invented their rapid firing crossbow, THEY POISONED THE ARROWS! Why? Due to the construction of it the bolts would barely be able to pierce the armor and skin, so poisoning all the bolts before loading them into the magazine was common. It was beyond simple, any ****** peasant could use it with deadly results, therefore it's better than a sling or slingshot. (Another History channel special, a couple of days ago too.)

making it ****** proof doesnt mean its better, just easier to field large groups who can be dangerous with almost no skill involved

yes the chinese were very advanced in warfare, crossbows, repeating crossbows, rockets, the first nation to truley mass produce arms, they used ranks of seveal types of bows with differing ranges so you were under continual fire from a vey long way off ...... but they didnt make it to the crusades either

poisoning weapons wasnt common in europe or the middle east for

and quoting "the history channel" isnt really that good source after the last 2 crusade time documentaries they produced

1) a look at how historic "the kingdom of heaven " was, they basically called it a totally historic document, they failed to notice the time line was wrong, the battle of hattin was wrong, the entire royal family and thier interactions was wrong, balian was wrong, 13th century knightly orders popped up in a 12th century film, renald de chatilon wasnt a templer, guy de lusignone wasnt a templer

2) the cross and the crescent

4 hours of mindless piffel,

almost the first lines "there were many chroniclers that have handed down to us first hand accounts of the crusades from both sides, some of the more famous ones are richard of tyre" almost every quote aboute the first crusade comes from his writtings, the problem with his first hand accounts is a simple one he wasnt even born, he was born in the early 12th century in tyre, so how did he have a first hand account of the 11th century

first crusade, no mention of peter the hermit and the turks slaughtering and enslaving/executing what was left of a commoners army (pretty much unarmed men women children)

no mention of the many raids and slaughters carried out during the campaign with the exception of 1 that came later, no mention of the crusaders almost wiping out the entire population of syria as they went

second crusade lasted about 10 minutes and was a total failure so they skipped most of it

saladin captured jerusalm peacefully?? yes the several days of war engines battering the city, the several failed full scale attacks, the fact terms were agreed in a tent while a another assault was taken place .... all summed up in saladin captured jerusalem peacefully

the nizari get a mention too, it does the drug using crazies myth thing, seems to think they made 2 attempts on saladin( they made 3) and tries to say they took place while he was besieging allepo .. wrong

third crusade

almost total rubbish

"king richard marched towards jerusalem, now his next action has caused debate within the historian community he simply stopped the expedition and turned around and marched back, though his reasons are unclear some say he didnt have the men to hold jerusalem against a counter attack" maybe it was the battle of arsuf??(or did they forget to write that line in the script) where he won but took such massive casualties, he didnt have the man power to mount a realistic seige against jerusalem and then hold it afterwards

the battle of jaffa when saladin has effectivley captured the outer defences richard arrives just as the garrison are about to surrender saladins forces are trapped within the city and are forced to leave the city to try and destroy this new threat while maintaining enough forces should the crusader deffenders try to break out

now 'history channel' says "with just 50 knights and cross bow men richard battled all day on the beach"

but that just 50 turns out to be a slightly larger force, actuall 54 knights and around 2000 various men at arms and bow men

but they did manage to mention saladin sending richard a fine horse when his own died during the battle

its going with the namby pamby "oo crusaders were bad and the saracens were good, but lets not make them look to bad they are us after all" **** that so much medieval history is now tainted with

and some of thier roman history is almost as bad


You do know that the weapons advanced as the armor advanced too? There are arrows that can today pierce almost any armor aside from this juggernaut like armor the greeks invented.

yes armour advances were matched by weapon advances thats why short range slow inaccuarte fire arms took over from both cross bows and long bows becasue the bows couldnt pierce the armour

ill tell you what you grab a bow of choice and a full set of 15th century milanese armour ill happily stand at 100 meters and let you fire at me, might need to modify the helmet slightly so i can poke a cigarette through it to smoke so i dont get to bored while your managing to dent the armour

this greek jugernaught armour interests me, greek citizen soldiers had to supply thier own weapons and armour, depending on how well off they were it included hoplon shield, cuirass (leather/bronze), grieves helmet

the richer you were the better the armour you brought, if you were very well off you would go to battle as greek cavalry (similar equipment usually without the shield)

and so it stayed through out the hellonic era

so who would wear that armour? not a phalanx man, or cavalry, skirmishing slinger wouldnt be able to move fast enough or skirmishing archers ... id love to see a link for that

ScytheOfGrim
07-15-2007, 06:00 AM
i just hope whoever replies doesnt quote that post... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

STOP WIKIING!!!(is that a word??)

quicksilver_502
07-15-2007, 06:08 AM
a proper war slingshot used in battles could take a guy out but it was more for horse charges and a crossbow is quicker. but is the crossbow even still in it? if the d-pad selects weapons then there can only be 4. sword, short sword,throwing knives and switchblade. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif who knows

Clonage2006
07-15-2007, 06:29 AM
Crossbow. For get the Aerodynamics, the centrifugal force and what not, the Slingshot looks pathetic. Also I should point out that, due to the fact that you need to swing the slingshot about and stuff, It would probably take longer to 'Fire,' And in order to swing it around at all you will have to make sure your not stood near walls/people etc, otherwise you'll end up dropping the rock before you can even get one full swing in. Well, at least that's unless you want to lose realism entirely and allow the slingshot's pouch or whatever to go through walls.

noobfun
07-15-2007, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by ScytheOfGrim:
i just hope whoever replies doesnt quote that post... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

STOP WIKIING!!!(is that a word??)

i never wiki ^_^, well very rarely

and you 2 sling slow?

english longbowman 10-12 shots a minute
trained slinger 10-12 shots a minute
trained crossbow man 2-3 shots a minute

the_assassin_07
07-15-2007, 08:48 AM
its also Assassins creed not bart simpson
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
Altair:Could I borrow your slingshot
Bart:Eat my shorts!
Altair: HOOOOO WAW (kills him with hidden blade)
Altair: Yes! now i can use it!
Altair:Oo theres an enemy *fire*
Enemy(Homer):*stone bounces off his belly* THATS FOR KILLING MILHOUSE.....hang on a minute AHHHH! THATS BART oh hang on I don't care about him *whistles*
Altair:Phew!
LOL

-You can't escape the Assassin-

the_assassin_07
07-15-2007, 08:54 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:
You do know that the weapons advanced as the armor advanced too? There are arrows that can today pierce almost any armor aside from this juggernaut like armor the greeks invented. I saw it on the History Channel so it's not bull.

When arrows penetrate the skin, they tend to cause much more damage than a stone due to the shape of the arrowhead. And poisoning arrows was common for assassinations. Not open warfare.
yes it will, but the point is a sling doent need to penetrate to do damage, it can hit your armour and kill you without trying to penetrate a large lump of metal, also you dont seem familiar with sling shot for warfare known as sling bullets made of sun baked clay or more normally metal

roman archers were trained with the maximum distance of target bieng 180 meters, roman slingers were trained with a maximum distance of 220 meters

an average sling bullet has the same mass as an arrow but a fraction of the surface area meaning inflight air drag effected it much less meaning it carried more of its force to strike the target then an arrow would


quote:
What the hell are you talking about when you say Native Americans and crusades? They were on OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE WORLD. Plus we don't know much about the Navites seeing how those early Spanish, English and Portugese *******s burned a lot of the records.


i didnt bring it up, i pointed out that they wernt at the crusades, and native americans wernt well known for bieng great librarians, i may be wrong but they didnt have a complex writting system like the aztecs/incas did of middle south america, and those accounts of bieng attacked by slings are from recentish history of america


quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:P.S: If anyone wants to really go into history, then they can look at records of the crusades, and see that in 99.9% of instances the military forces involved were armed with bows (yew or elm long to be more specific), not slingshots. For some reason I just couldnt imagine a war being fought with elastic bands tied to sticks, but whoknows, mabey im wrong.

Dude, I didn't even post that!


my appologies i put your name not togalive by mistake


quote:
Here is why the bow/crossbow is better than the sling. It's easier to master than the sling.

Oh, and about that poisoning thing, when the chinese invented their rapid firing crossbow, THEY POISONED THE ARROWS! Why? Due to the construction of it the bolts would barely be able to pierce the armor and skin, so poisoning all the bolts before loading them into the magazine was common. It was beyond simple, any ****** peasant could use it with deadly results, therefore it's better than a sling or slingshot. (Another History channel special, a couple of days ago too.)


making it ****** proof doesnt mean its better, just easier to field large groups who can be dangerous with almost no skill involved

yes the chinese were very advanced in warfare, crossbows, repeating crossbows, rockets, the first nation to truley mass produce arms, they used ranks of seveal types of bows with differing ranges so you were under continual fire from a vey long way off ...... but they didnt make it to the crusades either

poisoning weapons wasnt common in europe or the middle east for

and quoting "the history channel" isnt really that good source after the last 2 crusade time documentaries they produced

1) a look at how historic "the kingdom of heaven " was, they basically called it a totally historic document, they failed to notice the time line was wrong, the battle of hattin was wrong, the entire royal family and thier interactions was wrong, balian was wrong, 13th century knightly orders popped up in a 12th century film, renald de chatilon wasnt a templer, guy de lusignone wasnt a templer

2) the cross and the crescent

4 hours of mindless piffel,

almost the first lines "there were many chroniclers that have handed down to us first hand accounts of the crusades from both sides, some of the more famous ones are richard of tyre" almost every quote aboute the first crusade comes from his writtings, the problem with his first hand accounts is a simple one he wasnt even born, he was born in the early 12th century in tyre, so how did he have a first hand account of the 11th century

first crusade, no mention of peter the hermit and the turks slaughtering and enslaving/executing what was left of a commoners army (pretty much unarmed men women children)

no mention of the many raids and slaughters carried out during the campaign with the exception of 1 that came later, no mention of the crusaders almost wiping out the entire population of syria as they went

second crusade lasted about 10 minutes and was a total failure so they skipped most of it

saladin captured jerusalm peacefully?? yes the several days of war engines battering the city, the several failed full scale attacks, the fact terms were agreed in a tent while a another assault was taken place .... all summed up in saladin captured jerusalem peacefully

the nizari get a mention too, it does the drug using crazies myth thing, seems to think they made 2 attempts on saladin( they made 3) and tries to say they took place while he was besieging allepo .. wrong

third crusade

almost total rubbish

"king richard marched towards jerusalem, now his next action has caused debate within the historian community he simply stopped the expedition and turned around and marched back, though his reasons are unclear some say he didnt have the men to hold jerusalem against a counter attack" maybe it was the battle of arsuf??(or did they forget to write that line in the script) where he won but took such massive casualties, he didnt have the man power to mount a realistic seige against jerusalem and then hold it afterwards

the battle of jaffa when saladin has effectivley captured the outer defences richard arrives just as the garrison are about to surrender saladins forces are trapped within the city and are forced to leave the city to try and destroy this new threat while maintaining enough forces should the crusader deffenders try to break out

now 'history channel' says "with just 50 knights and cross bow men richard battled all day on the beach"

but that just 50 turns out to be a slightly larger force, actuall 54 knights and around 2000 various men at arms and bow men

but they did manage to mention saladin sending richard a fine horse when his own died during the battle

its going with the namby pamby "oo crusaders were bad and the saracens were good, but lets not make them look to bad they are us after all" **** that so much medieval history is now tainted with

and some of thier roman history is almost as bad


quote:
You do know that the weapons advanced as the armor advanced too? There are arrows that can today pierce almost any armor aside from this juggernaut like armor the greeks invented.


yes armour advances were matched by weapon advances thats why short range slow inaccuarte fire arms took over from both cross bows and long bows becasue the bows couldnt pierce the armour

ill tell you what you grab a bow of choice and a full set of 15th century milanese armour ill happily stand at 100 meters and let you fire at me, might need to modify the helmet slightly so i can poke a cigarette through it to smoke so i dont get to bored while your managing to dent the armour

this greek jugernaught armour interests me, greek citizen soldiers had to supply thier own weapons and armour, depending on how well off they were it included hoplon shield, cuirass (leather/bronze), grieves helmet

the richer you were the better the armour you brought, if you were very well off you would go to battle as greek cavalry (similar equipment usually without the shield)

and so it stayed through out the hellonic era

so who would wear that armour? not a phalanx man, or cavalry, skirmishing slinger wouldnt be able to move fast enough or skirmishing archers ... id love to see a link for that
A+ You will get your essay back tomorrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

i just hope whoever replies doesnt quote that post...
MUHAHAHAAHAHHHAHAHAHA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


-You can't escape the Assassin-

noobfun
07-15-2007, 08:56 AM
Originally posted by the_assassin_07:
A+ You will get your essay back tomorrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> i just hope whoever replies doesnt quote that post...
MUHAHAHAAHAHHHAHAHAHA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


-You can't escape the Assassin- </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

lol im getting graded now?

p.s. bart simpson uses a hand catapult, sling shot are the ammo for a sling

ScytheOfGrim
07-15-2007, 09:00 AM
darn you!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-mad.gif

TO THE PRINCIPLE'S OFFICE, IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

whipping is legal from now on http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
(unless you're aiming at me...)

Tatersalad810
07-15-2007, 10:49 PM
quote:
making it ****** proof doesnt mean its better, just easier to field large groups who can be dangerous with almost no skill involved


Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups with idiot proof weapons. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif I'd rather have a country full of idiots with repeating crossbows than an army of slingers.


Oh and that juggernaut armor was never used because noone could effectively fight with it, but if you were to put a bomb on someone and have them walk into the center of the enemy force and detonate it they could.

noobfun
07-15-2007, 11:29 PM
Originally posted by Tatersalad810:
quote:
making it ****** proof doesnt mean its better, just easier to field large groups who can be dangerous with almost no skill involved


Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups with idiot proof weapons. im really tempted to say what like america? .. but ill behave and wont



http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif I'd rather have a country full of idiots with repeating crossbows than an army of slingers. sounds like a fun battle give me the same number of trained slinger wonder how many of you would manage to close the gap so you could hit us back

having to run 300 meters under deadly fire while the enemy is runnning firing running too may take you a while until you can even try and hit us



Oh and that juggernaut armor was never used because noone could effectively fight with it, but if you were to put a bomb on someone and have them walk into the center of the enemy force and detonate it they could.

the greek city states that well known branch of terrorism, xenophon invented the cart bomb in 423bc only he wasnt that well practiced and filled it with straw instead of shrapnel .....

your not doing you claims of sanity or self knowledge any good with this junk

next youll be telling us the knights templar were protectig the holy blood line from the priory of sion, because the priory of sion had slings so were against god .. or some other junk

Vladimir_Art
06-27-2019, 04:58 PM
check Xenophon and his work Anabasis..the in the 3rd book of Anabasis it is described how the fate of 10.000 heavy infantry men was changed because slingers were recruited...very helpful millitary unit (slingers) when you need to keep the enemy at distance...

Ubi-RealDude
06-28-2019, 08:51 PM
Thread closed due to necro.