| |
| | Post 41 |
| Tribunus Laticlavius | It takes years to train a bowman, it can take a few hours to teach a person to use a gun
__________________ LeEnfield Rides again |
| |
| | Post 42 | |
| Primus Pilus | Quote:
| |
| |
| | Post 43 |
| Primus Pilus | This raises the issue why no-one has ever come up with poison bullets. Peraphs they have and they are classed as chemical weapons? Interesting that the ancients deliberately used both chemical and biological weapons, things we assume to be modern!
__________________ Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country. Herman Goering |
| |
| | Post 44 |
| Immunes | As others have said, there are very good reasons why guns replaced bows within decades of their introduction. THEY ARE SUPERIOR IN ALMOST EVERY RESPECT. |
| |
| | Post 45 |
| Tribunus Laticlavius | Snowblind....it is only over the the 150 years that guns have really improved, before that it was easier to teach them to use a rifle than to use a bow. It was the introduction of the flintlock and rifling that really started to make a difference on the range and accuracy and distance that gave the rifle real hitting power. |
| |
| | Post 46 | |
| Primus Pilus | Quote:
Historically, poisoned projectiles weren't terribly common in most parts of the world. | |
| |
| | Post 47 | |
| Primus Pilus | Quote:
oh, and if you run ot of ammo in the wilderness, you can fairly easily make some crude replacements for the bow. with the gun, youve effectively got an over-elaborate hammer. Last edited by Insomniac; July 16th, 2006 at 10:42. | |
| |