.
I'm telling you, time travel has advanced a lot these days. Check out this
squad of archers from the 16th century having a practice day.
> video <
I like near the end how that dude bends down between shots to present
a lower profile. I'll have to practice that.
.
Take a look at this
.
I don't like it. That giant fat dude would get killed in an ancient battle field scenario.
Kinda like how rule 1 of Zombieland is: Cardio. Don't be fat.
.
It would look even more realistic if there weren't cars driving by and some of the archers didn't wear glasses ;-)
Aside from that it's pretty impressive.
Seriously? The guy is in little danger of ending up in an ancient battle scenario.Take a look at this.
I don't like it. That giant fat dude would get killed in an ancient battle field scenario.
Kinda like how rule 1 of Zombieland is: Cardio. Don't be fat.
.
.
word.
.
It would look even more realistic if there weren't cars driving by and some of the archers didn't wear glasses ;-)
Aside from that it's pretty impressive.
.
Oh, it was completely realistic. Those guys are not actors. They do that
stuff for reals.
In the video, the first guy we see with glasses is the 13th generation of
a samurai family.
.
.
I wonder if it is better to have 100 arrow-shots every 6 seconds, or 50 arrow-shots
every 3 seconds, in a battle?
Maybe the higher archer fire-rate is better, because it "pins" the enemy
down thus offering cover for the advancement of the other half. And as they get closer
accuracy goes up. (in both directions, however)
.
I meant more looking like it's 16th century. If it isn't a particularly old video and they've taken pains to make it look like one of B&W movies by Kurosawa, then they could have chosen better place for casting than a football playfield in the middle of a town.
Loosing more arrows at once in a salvo with somewhat lesser frequency had better effect on the enemy in mass combat IMO, finding weak spots even in shield walls and felling enemies in the way. It created a difficult terrain that slowed down movement or threw organized lines to disarray. Less arrows with greater frequency were good to keep enemy cowering while the archers or other units were moving about. So I think that greater salvo was good to deal with organized ranks on the move, while greater shooting rate was good for keeping units pinned and for disorganized units, that could't put up any effective defense.
I meant more looking like it's 16th century. If it isn't a
particularly old video and they've taken pains to make it look like one
of B&W movies by Kurosawa, then they could have chosen better place for
casting than a football playfield in the middle of a town.
.
Personally, I think it is a home movie from the 1960's of a real training session.
.
Loosing more arrows at once in a salvo with somewhat lesser frequency had
better effect on the enemy in mass combat IMO, finding weak spots even in
shield walls and felling enemies in the way. It created a difficult
terrain that slowed down movement or threw organized lines to disarray.Less arrows with greater frequency were good to keep enemy cowering while
the archers or other units were moving about. So I think that greater
salvo was good to deal with organized ranks on the move, while greater
shooting rate was good for keeping units pinned and for disorganized
units, that could't put up any effective defense.
.
That's a good explanation.
.
I think that important thing to note is that combat used to be a matter of formations. An archer was probably aming at someone directly in front of him, but as a whole the formation's goal was to send as many arrows at once as it was possible somewhere into the formation of the enemy. Hiting any particular guy was not really as important as hitting the formation as a whole. Close packed mass of people usually took care of inaccuracy. If the enemy loosened ranks (or they were really thinned by arows and didn't have time to close the formation again to a compact shape), then the archers could easily swithch to annoyance shooting mode and only wait a little longer, because this was usually the thing for which mounted spearmen were waiting for. Cavalry attack can usually be stoped only by a deep formation of polearm equipped infantry, otherwise they just push through and break enemy line by sheer kinetic energy. Heavy armour generally keept heavy cavalry safe from arrows unless the archers were really massed, organized and had something to stop the cavalry from moving. Only the introduction of firearms brought real changes.
.
Their quivers are very interesting. Each arrow is individually tied.
But allows for easy removal and not getting the arrow head tangled up
with other arrows.
I wonder if their system is a result of observing "what not to do" during
100's of battles?
.
I have two new arrows. They cost me 1,000¥ each.
I think that important thing to note is that combat used to be a matter of formations. An archer was probably aming at someone directly in front of him, but as a whole the formation's goal was to send as many arrows at once as it was possible somewhere into the formation of the enemy. Hiting any particular guy was not really as important as hitting the formation as a whole. Close packed mass of people usually took care of inaccuracy. If the enemy loosened ranks (or they were really thinned by arows and didn't have time to close the formation again to a compact shape), then the archers could easily swithch to annoyance shooting mode and only wait a little longer, because this was usually the thing for which mounted spearmen were waiting for. Cavalry attack can usually be stoped only by a deep formation of polearm equipped infantry, otherwise they just push through and break enemy line by sheer kinetic energy. Heavy armour generally keept heavy cavalry safe from arrows unless the archers were really massed, organized and had something to stop the cavalry from moving. Only the introduction of firearms brought real changes.
I don't think this is how it works. Because each group in the formation
is lead by someone trying to earn 'honor points' -- and be cool. So, anycohesive formation, after the initial charge, was mostly coincidental.
.