[Ansteorra-archery] on the use of archers

[jack spinks]

I believe the good gentles are correct.  It is only those good kills from that perfect shot that the archers live for just as fighters live for those good kills that they get one on one. And those archer kills are increasingly hard to come by with the slower arrows (APDs and additional foam) and the trend toward limiting arrows carried into battle.
 
I dont usually shoot combat any more for a variety of reasons.  But how many archers are you talking about?  When I hear the term "volley" I tend to think of a hundred or more in the air.  But how many archers are in a battle- 10?  20?   I just cannot visualize a volley of 20 inaccurate arrows being that effective.
 
And since the trend is toward shooting slower and slower arrows (additional foam in addition to the APDs) plus limiting the number of arrows that can be carried to 15 or so, I would tend to agree with the archers about "throwing an arrow away" in a volley of fire where the object is simply to get the enemy to react.  If you want the archers to support such you will have to make it worthwhile for them to do so in some way.   I have always considered 50 arrows to be the minimum to go into a battle with.  That is $150 worth and considerable time per arrow for those of you that have not considered such. So why would I want to throw one of those arrows away on a poorly aimed "volley" that might or might not hit someone that might or might not call it?
 
Jaque
 
 
 

--- On Mon, 2/16/09, Sir Morgan Buchanan <morganbuchanan at hotmail.com> wrote:

From: Sir Morgan Buchanan <morganbuchanan at hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Ansteorra-archery] on the use of archers
To: ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
Date: Monday, February 16, 2009, 3:40 PM

I've ruminated on this post since I read it, and before I really respond,
I'd like to know if this is is a widely held belief.  I want Robin to know I
have every respect for his opinion, but I like to hear from a larger portion of
a group to get a representative sample rather than just take for granted that
someone is speaking for "most" of a group.

Morgan


----- Original Message ----- 
> 
> Success in a tactic isn't predicated on the kills that each individual
> potential killing shot has, but on the success of the whole attack.?
> 
> Oh but if only you know how hard it is for that one simple lesson to be
learned!!
> ?? Most SCA fighters are basically megalomaniacs and that includes
archers. Trying to get an archer to shoot at an area or a mass of men is met
with a great deal of resistance. Archers like other fighters want to have their
own kills acknowledged. They want to see their arrow hit someone and get credit
for it. It is extremely satisfying phsychologically. Shooting at a group or an
area "FEELS" like you're throwing an arrow away. And that arrow
took time to make and money to buy the materials and once it is used in a battle
you can't get it back. Compare that to a sword or spear shot. Once
you've made the weapon you have almost unlimited shots to take.
> ?? I think your views on using archers are on target but you need to look
more closely at the difficulties in getting the results you want.
> Again back to retirement
> Robin
> 

_______________________________________________
Ansteorra-archery mailing list
Ansteorra-archery at lists.ansteorra.org
http://lists.ansteorra.org/listinfo.cgi/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ansteorra.org/pipermail/ansteorra-archery-ansteorra.org/attachments/20090216/be8519bc/attachment-0002.htm>