Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Huns's descendants horse archery

12346

Comments

  • MortalMortal Senior Member Posts: 174Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Belialxv wrote: »
    They didnt attacked the Sassanids...... It's like saying that the French were better than the Song dynasty because the Mongols didnt defeated the French.

    I read that after attacking the eastern roman empire 398AD they moved onto the Sassanids and attacked towards the capital but were defeated by a Persian counter attack.

    This was all after the Huns had subjugated the Alans.
  • ☢Wraith of Pegasus☢Wraith of Pegasus Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Belialxv wrote: »
    They didnt attacked the Sassanids...... It's like saying that the French were better than the Song dynasty because the Mongols didnt defeated the French.
    Indeed he got point there, White huns attacked Sassanian I already sourced you to it. anyway this is white hun vic but later on they lose to sassanids and other turkish factions.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Herat_%28484%29
    ☢Exponential Decay☢
  • MortalMortal Senior Member Posts: 174Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Indeed he got point there, White huns attacked Sassanian I already sourced you to it. anyway this is white hun vic but later on they lose to sassanids and other turkish factions.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Herat_%28484%29

    I believe the white huns are different, According to Procopius's History of the Wars, written in the mid 6th century - the Hephthalites "are of the stock of the Huns in fact as well as in name: however they do not mingle with any of the Huns known to us. They are the only ones among the Huns who have white bodies....".

    It is important to note the white huns beat the Sassanian king in 485AD but i meant the Sassanids held the Huns back during 398AD after they had attacked the Eastern Roman Empire. Causing the huns to retreat north passed the caucuses mountains.

    White Huns lived east of the Sassanids.
  • MabuyaQMabuyaQ Senior Member Posts: 797Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    gage2617 wrote: »
    At this point the longbow used by the Germanics were nothing like those used in the later middle ages. The iconic longbow used by the Welsh and English didn't come until much, much later. Western Europe as a whole didn't really develop a strong archery tradition at all, with most nations opting for crossbows even in the later middle ages, and in the case of Iberia and Italy, javelins were still popular right up until gunpowder was introduced.

    The bows of the Germanic tribes in this time would have been relatively simple and crude, used mostly for hunting. I expect the Germanics should have probably the weakest archers compared to the other factions. Archery didn't have a very strong tradition in the Germanic tribes, with most preferring to use javelins. The strong point for the Germanics would be very strong heavy infantry and light infantry, with both carrying a large number of javelins or throwing axes, like angons or franciscas. The only group of Germanics that I can see as having decent archers at this point in history are the Franks and Goths, since archaeologically many arrows seem to be found in their graves. While we don't know much about exactly what bow they used, we can infer by the quantity of arrows found that they were proficient in archery. That coupled with the fact that scale armor can be found in Frankish and Gothic graves indicates that they were at least partially influenced by Eastern warfare, so perhaps they had recurves. I don't expect even the Franks to be able to match the eastern factions at all in archery, but simply have decent archer units that could contend with, say, the WRE.

    Sorry have to disagree, because we have several finds from Danmark and Germany of yew or fir longbows belonging to this period that are so similar to the Mary Rose longbow (and how long did it take to find that bow as a true example of the 'mythical' English longbow even though there were so many written records about English longbows) that they must have been just as good as the longbows of the later medieval period. Some of the longbows are even dating back to pre Roman times. There are even examples where sinew was used as rapping around the wood for extra strength, some were self nocked others used horn or iron nocks and several even had ends sharp enough they might have been able to use them as close quarters weapons. So there were good archers available in this time frame for all the Germanic invaders.

    The only reason why so few bows (of any period) have been found is because bows made almost completely out of organic materials not only preserve badly in wet Northern European soils, bows are also 'disposable'/perishable as over time they degrade and another use is found for the wood (if only to add extra warmth by burning it) and the other materials of that bow. It isn't a weapon that can be handed down from father to son like a good sword or other metal weapon.
    The best weapon against an enemy is another enemy. (Friedrich Nietsche)
    The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting. (Sun Tzu)
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Belialxv wrote: »
    I agree there, I may ad that balance does take a place in giving stats to units.

    I do like history, but I only saw wiki on this thread, as I already said: its a joke source.

    Again Alans didnt fought Sassanids, we wont be able to present facts that one was better than the other.
    I quoted Ammianus for you but it seems you didn't read anything and just barged in to say the nomads were superior.
  • gage2617gage2617 Senior Member Posts: 751Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    MabuyaQ wrote: »
    Sorry have to disagree, because we have several finds from Danmark and Germany of yew or fir longbows belonging to this period that are so similar to the Mary Rose longbow (and how long did it take to find that bow as a true example of the 'mythical' English longbow even though there were so many written records about English longbows) that they must have been just as good as the longbows of the later medieval period. Some of the longbows are even dating back to pre Roman times. There are even examples where sinew was used as rapping around the wood for extra strength, some were self nocked others used horn or iron nocks and several even had ends sharp enough they might have been able to use them as close quarters weapons. So there were good archers available in this time frame for all the Germanic invaders.

    The only reason why so few bows (of any period) have been found is because bows made almost completely out of organic materials not only preserve badly in wet Northern European soils, bows are also 'disposable'/perishable as over time they degrade and another use is found for the wood (if only to add extra warmth by burning it) and the other materials of that bow. It isn't a weapon that can be handed down from father to son like a good sword or other metal weapon.

    That's fascinating to me. Do you have sources to back it up? I'd really like to read up on that.

    I've been looking into it myself and I just can't imagine them having very capable archers. All the bows I can find referenced to in this period are the one from Frankish and Alemanni graves and the Nydam bows from the shipwreck in Denmark. From what I can tell most of the bows were of rather poor quality, heck most of them didn't even have grips, and even the best of them only had a draw weight of around 65lb which isn't even powerful enough for a typical warbow. Also, if they had very good bow technology and had archery as good as that of late medieval longbows, then it wouldn't make sense that they overwhelmingly opted to use throwing weapons instead, and in the case of the Nordic peoples, staff slings as well. While it's true that there were definitely longbows, with the biggest at apparently 6 and a half feet tall, their draw weight is only half of a typical longbow from the medieval period, and too weak to even be considered suitable for war. The oldest finds I can see of yew longbow designs are also only 3rd century and certainly not pre-Roman.

    I'm looking more online to see if I can find anything, and even the best bows used 400 years later in the Viking period were only 90lb typically, so nothing special. Also, it seems that the only references I can find to well made bows used by the Germanics in this time is some obscure references to them using "Hunnish bows", so if they have any decent bows, they were imports from the east.
  • Böri ShadBöri Shad Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    @rofl

    You think persians archers superior to Turkic archers? Just yes or no.
  • Nortrix87Nortrix87 Senior Member Posts: 991Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    I wonder how they wil have climate influence archers.

    All bows gets an penalty in wet weather, but aspechely the composite bows.
    They littarly fell apart when exposed to water. And how wil the Hunns deal with this in wet western europe? Retreat on an rainy day?
    "We men are the monsters now. The time of heroes is dead, Wiglaf - the Christ God has killed it, leaving humankind with nothing but weeping martyrs, fear, and shame."

    - Beowulf
  • ErminazErminaz Senior Member Las Vegas, Nevada, USAPosts: 5,529Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Nortrix87 wrote: »
    I wonder how they wil have climate influence archers.

    All bows gets an penalty in wet weather, but aspechely the composite bows.
    They littarly fell apart when exposed to water. And how wil the Hunns deal with this in wet western europe? Retreat on an rainy day?

    Interesting point, the animal resins used in the construction of composite bows tend to break down in the wet weather common in Northern Europe which would result in their bows breaking down. This of course will most likely be ignored by CA and all bows will most likely operate along the same lines in the differing weather conditions we find in the battles.
    Tacitus Quotes:
    Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.

    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
    The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.

    I found Rome a city of filth covered marble and left it a pile of rubble. - Me
  • TheGuardianOfMetalTheGuardianOfMetal Senior Member Posts: 9,112Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Nortrix87 wrote: »
    I wonder how they wil have climate influence archers.

    All bows gets an penalty in wet weather, but aspechely the composite bows.
    They littarly fell apart when exposed to water. And how wil the Hunns deal with this in wet western europe? Retreat on an rainy day?

    hmm

    Huns: We're going to kill you all!
    Germans: yeah yeah... bring it on... hey it's starting to rain... should make their cavalry less usefull in the muddy field
    Huns: Ahm could we postpone our battle? Our bows are dissolving themselves...
    Germans: yeah... sure... ATTACK!
    Every wrong is recorded! Every slight against us! Page after Page, etched in blood! Clan Gunnison! Karak Eight-Peaks! Josef Bugman!

    Yes! to Boris Todbringer as playable, subfaction leading Legendary Lord with Starting Position Middenheim instead for the Empire! NO to the lazy way of moving Gelt and Volkmar who both belong to Reikland!

    Where is Boris Todbringer? Have you seen him?
  • Gardan_KoloftGardan_Koloft Senior Member Zamin_e_IranPosts: 999Registered Users, Smiley
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    @rofl

    You think persians archers superior to Turkic archers? Just yes or no.
    They both used very similar bows so it's hard to say.
    I!..!I
    “The lion is most handsome when hunting”
  • CagataiKhanCagataiKhan Senior Member Posts: 808Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    They both used very similar bows so it's hard to say.
    lol.You dont know anythings bow and archery.. Best Bow is Ottoman recurved composite bow.Alltimes turkic bow > persian bow
  • BelialxvBelialxv Senior Member SteppesPosts: 1,627Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    lol.You dont know anythings bow and archery.. Best Bow is Ottoman recurved composite bow.Alltimes turkic bow > persian bow

    Indeed my friend, persian are far to be the best archers in history... FAR from that :p

    Nomads and their descandant are the best :)
    ajz9uoslnqoi.jpg


    HUITZILOPOCHTLI

    god of war

    LIZARDMEN #makelustriagreatagain
    Clan Moulder #masterclan
  • BelialxvBelialxv Senior Member SteppesPosts: 1,627Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    They both used very similar bows so it's hard to say.

    Did the Old Guard also used a similar weapon than the persion Immortal in your world?... We never know :p
    ajz9uoslnqoi.jpg


    HUITZILOPOCHTLI

    god of war

    LIZARDMEN #makelustriagreatagain
    Clan Moulder #masterclan
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    @rofl

    You think persians archers superior to Turkic archers? Just yes or no.
    They were the equal in skill in this time period. The Turks were superior in the middle ages. All your quotes are about the middle ages when the Persians didn't even have armies. The 900 yard shot by Sultan Selim is just a fairy tale just like Arash's. Enough about the nationalism. Gage is right you guys are just arguing about whose ancestors are better.

    PS what you quoted was wrong the Turks were never an ideal of manliness. The word Turk and Turkzad were mostly used as an insult especially in the Poetry of Hafez and Saadi. That's as far as I know.
  • Böri ShadBöri Shad Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    rofl wrote: »
    They were the equal in skill in this time period. The Turks were superior in the middle ages. All your quotes are about the middle ages when the Persians didn't even have armies. The 900 yard shot by Sultan Selim is just a fairy tale just like Arash's. Enough about the nationalism. Gage is right you guys are just arguing about whose ancestors are better.

    PS what you quoted was wrong the Turks were never an ideal of manliness. The word Turk and Turkzad were mostly used as an insult especially in the Poetry of Hafez and Saadi. That's as far as I know.
    Tell those to you persian ancestors who wrote the poems.

    Check the poems from here
    Schimmel, 'Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and its Application to Historical Facts', in: S. Vryonis Jr (ed.), Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages (Wiesbaden, 1973), p. 110, note 17.

    I'm following arguing of yours for days and you and your kinsmen claiming "superiority" of your ancestors for days and after facing REAL sources, accusing me with "my ancestors are better" thing? funny. Also not all sources from medieval. That Armenian historian quotes from 7th century and he clearly describes how powerful Turkic archers.
  • Böri ShadBöri Shad Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    rofl wrote: »
    The 900 yard shot by Sultan Selim is just a fairy tale just like Arash's.
    Who said it was Selim?

    Turkish terms of bows and arrows extremely rich.

    There are categories of arrows. And levels goes as 800 yards with Haki Arrow and 850 with Yüksüvar Arrow and 900 with Pişrev Arrow. There are many Archery fields in Turkey and numberless Ottoman archery stones. (archery stones building to show how far people shooting)

    There is a book named "Atıcılar Sicil Defteri" which means "Shooter's list" shows people who shot over 900 yards and there are 3375 people between 1682-1891.

    Tell me more about fairy tales.
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    Tell those to you persian ancestors who wrote the poems.

    Check the poems from here
    Schimmel, 'Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and its Application to Historical Facts', in: S. Vryonis Jr (ed.), Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages (Wiesbaden, 1973), p. 110, note 17.

    I'm following arguing of yours for days and you and your kinsmen claiming "superiority" of your ancestors for days and after facing REAL sources, accusing me with "my ancestors are better" thing? funny. Also not all sources from medieval. That Armenian historian quotes from 7th century and he clearly describes how powerful Turkic archers.
    Kinsmen? I don't even know Persian. Did that Armenian source say that they were better than the Persians? I never said the Turks were bad horse archers, did I?

    Here's your medieval sources:

    Opened his tongue in execration of the Turks
    Saying: Without calamity no Turk is born of his mother
    Seek not from aught save the frown on the eye-brow (the vexation of the heart):
    They observe not the treaty of men
    True speech uttered the ancients
    Treaty-faith exists not among the men of Chin
    They have all chosen being narrow-eyed
    They have beheld openness of the eye (generosity) in others
    Otherwise , after such amity
    Why do they take up the path of hatred?
    What was the point in seeking friendliness first?
    And in the end, enmity for what account?
    My covenant was true and heart was too
    Wholesomeness great, idle talk near none
    I did not know that your love was hate;
    If the Turk of Chin had kept faith
    He would have kept the world under the folds of his garment
    -Nizami


    This torkzād is not worthy of the throne
    No one is supportive of his kingship
    He is of the blood of the Khaqan and of evil nature
    His form and stature like that of his mother,
    You thought Hormoz was worthy of this crown,
    Now you see your punishment stems from his real worth
    -Ferdowsi

    I'm sorry for this. I hope the mods close the thread before the flame war begins.
  • Böri ShadBöri Shad Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    I posted overall view towards Turks among persians. (see my long post, it's combination of many) and they were all praising Turks as saviors. We all know who wrote bad things about Turks. There are many poets also hate Arabs. Because they LOST their country. of course, it's normal to hate people who conquered them. You may not know but we call that butthurt.
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    I posted overall view towards Turks among persians. (see my long post, it's combination of many) and they were all praising Turks as saviors. We all know who wrote bad things about Turks. There are many poets also hate Arabs. Because they LOST their country. of course, it's normal to hate people who conquered them. You may not know but we call that butthurt.
    You didn't. You quoted a book talking about the Turks while only mentioning two Persians. You are only here to prove how the Turks are superior to the Persians and they were in the middle ages but they weren't superior in the times of the Sassanids.

    Edit: Your quote mentioned the Daylamites were more warlike :)
    and it was from wikipedia.
  • Böri ShadBöri Shad Senior Member Posts: 147Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Daylamites are famous with their warlike nature. I'm not denying the FACT unlike you and your kinsmen. But after meeting Turks they saw them as saviors and praised them because of their brave nature. But according to you even persians are equal archers to Turks. lmao. You can say persians had good army, good cavalry, good infantry etc. I wouldn't and can't say 'no'. But you guys don't know where to stop and breaching to different level to praise sassanids.
  • gage2617gage2617 Senior Member Posts: 751Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Can't we just settle on the fact that both cultures had highly skilled mounted archers and that battles between the two will ultimately be decided by the tactical leadership of the player? You guys should come together and we can talk about how bad germanic horse archers are compared to the east. I think we can all agree on that. :D
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    Daylamites are famous with their warlike nature. I'm not denying the FACT unlike you and your kinsmen. But after meeting Turks they saw them as saviors and praised them because of their brave nature. But according to you even persians are equal archers to Turks. lmao. You can say persians had good army, good cavalry, good infantry etc. I wouldn't and can't say 'no'. But you guys don't know where to stop and breaching to different level to praise sassanids.
    Sassanids deserve praise because they are the most underrated empire of all time. You can't compare the Turks and the Persians of the middle ages and then say the Turks were better than the Sassanids in horse archery. Come up with sources that say the Gokturks archers were better than the Sassanids instead of comparing them with the Seljuqs. And when did the Daylamites consider the Turks as saviors?
  • BelialxvBelialxv Senior Member SteppesPosts: 1,627Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    gage2617 wrote: »
    Can't we just settle on the fact that both cultures had highly skilled mounted archers and that battles between the two will ultimately be decided by the tactical leadership of the player? You guys should come together and we can talk about how bad germanic horse archers are compared to the east. I think we can all agree on that. :D

    Yep, lets do that :D
    ajz9uoslnqoi.jpg


    HUITZILOPOCHTLI

    god of war

    LIZARDMEN #makelustriagreatagain
    Clan Moulder #masterclan
  • CagataiKhanCagataiKhan Senior Member Posts: 808Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    The subject was deviated by 3 İranian friends.. The subject isnt related to Great Sassanids army,heavy cav ,fot archers or Gokturks-sasanids wars.Just Horse archery...lol
  • Nortrix87Nortrix87 Senior Member Posts: 991Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Erminaz wrote: »
    Interesting point, the animal resins used in the construction of composite bows tend to break down in the wet weather common in Northern Europe which would result in their bows breaking down. This of course will most likely be ignored by CA and all bows will most likely operate along the same lines in the differing weather conditions we find in the battles.

    Yeah i guess, its an pity as that is basicaly the only real advantage self bows has against the composite bows and why composite bows never became popular in the west.
    hmm

    Huns: We're going to kill you all!
    Germans: yeah yeah... bring it on... hey it's starting to rain... should make their cavalry less usefull in the muddy field
    Huns: Ahm could we postpone our battle? Our bows are dissolving themselves...
    Germans: yeah... sure... ATTACK!

    Hehe who knows maby that what happened at the Battle of Nedao were the Germanic alliance put and end to the Hunnic empire. ;)


    PS
    To the Persian vs Nomad debaters:

    Respect and manners guys, would be an pity if the thread was closed.
    Personaly like threads were history are discussed.

    Breath, relax and debate :)
    "We men are the monsters now. The time of heroes is dead, Wiglaf - the Christ God has killed it, leaving humankind with nothing but weeping martyrs, fear, and shame."

    - Beowulf
  • ErminazErminaz Senior Member Las Vegas, Nevada, USAPosts: 5,529Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Nortrix87 wrote: »
    Yeah i guess, its an pity as that is basicaly the only real advantage self bows has against the composite bows and why composite bows never became popular in the west.

    Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it get implemented but given CA's approach, and the changes in code it would take I doubt it will happen. I guess they could attempt to add it by giving it as a unit trait for Composite bow using units instead of attaching it to the weapon, like they have heat and cold resistance but in this case it would be a debuff.
    Tacitus Quotes:
    Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.

    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
    The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.

    I found Rome a city of filth covered marble and left it a pile of rubble. - Me
  • roflrofl Member Posts: 88Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Böri Shad wrote: »
    You don't even understand what I'm saying. How many sources should I bring? I brought many, just turn back and read. That Armenian historian was in there during Turkic-persian war and he stated what happened. Turks stormed persian fortress one after another and took entire Caucasus. What should have Turks do to prove their skills to you, master?

    @rostam

    stop editing my post in your quotes.
    They only won the Siege of Derbent while the Persians were busy with Heraclius and the rest were Heraclius' victories. What about the first two wars when it was just Sassanids vs Gokturks? I wonder, who won those wars? I heard two leaders were killed.
  • Nortrix87Nortrix87 Senior Member Posts: 991Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Erminaz wrote: »
    Don't get me wrong, I would love to see it get implemented but given CA's approach, and the changes in code it would take I doubt it will happen. I guess they could attempt to add it by giving it as a unit trait for Composite bow using units instead of attaching it to the weapon, like they have heat and cold resistance but in this case it would be a debuff.

    Long since i played rome 2 now and when i did i auto resolved alot. Actualy don`t remeber an battle with archers during rain. Was there eny penalty for archers? Remember it was penalties in previus total war games.

    They could make an minor range penalty for self bows and mayor for composites in the game. That would be fair + give the game both more realism and add to gameplay. Would be an easy fix also.
    "We men are the monsters now. The time of heroes is dead, Wiglaf - the Christ God has killed it, leaving humankind with nothing but weeping martyrs, fear, and shame."

    - Beowulf
  • ErminazErminaz Senior Member Las Vegas, Nevada, USAPosts: 5,529Registered Users
    edited January 2015
    Nortrix87 wrote: »
    Long since i played rome 2 now and when i did i auto resolved alot. Actualy don`t remeber an battle with archers during rain. Was there eny penalty for archers? Remember it was penalties in previus total war games.

    They could make an minor range penalty for self bows and mayor for composites in the game. That would be fair + give the game both more realism and add to gameplay.

    To tell the truth I'm not really sure but they have removed many of the features we found in previous games such as medieval 2 where you got a range bonus for being on a hill (although there is supposed to be some other kind of bonus for being on a hill). For some reason I'm tempted to say that they changed it for Rome 2 where you just have weather effects being streamlined. I'll have to look into it and see if it is more complex than I was thinking.
    Tacitus Quotes:
    Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
    They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace.

    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.
    The more numerous the laws, the more corrupt the government.

    I found Rome a city of filth covered marble and left it a pile of rubble. - Me
This discussion has been closed.