Javelins and Skirmish

I was wondering if the EB team has any plan to modify the javelins animation of M2TW to resemble a bit more like the RTW version. It is really frustrating to play as a "ambusher/guerrilla/hit and run" faction (i´m playing as lithuania but a little modded) and see how your javelinmen takes ages to fire, don´t run enough -i even increased their speed for footman and range for javelins- or simply refuse to fire.

I really miss the javelinmen of RTW and their fast shoot and retreat animation, I think it would be great to have such good skirmishers instead of the poor done M2TW animation:furious3:

Do you have any plan concerning this? Also, do you know if it is moddable (i mean withouth changing the M2TW animation) changing some text files? As i said previously i tried modifying the range and increasing the speed of the foot soldier, but still is really sucky:wall:


Thanks in advance, and excuse my poor english, hope it is good enough:yes:

Me 2.

I wouldn't mind if javelins could be thrown while running. Would make me actually maybe use them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bucefalo

I was wondering if the EB team has any plan to modify the javelins animation of M2TW to resemble a bit more like the RTW version. It is really frustrating to play as a "ambusher/guerrilla/hit and run" faction (i´m playing as lithuania but a little modded) and see how your javelinmen takes ages to fire, don´t run enough -i even increased their speed for footman and range for javelins- or simply refuse to fire.

I really miss the javelinmen of RTW and their fast shoot and retreat animation, I think it would be great to have such good skirmishers instead of the poor done M2TW animation:furious3:

Do you have any plan concerning this? Also, do you know if it is moddable (i mean withouth changing the M2TW animation) changing some text files? As i said previously i tried modifying the range and increasing the speed of the foot soldier, but still is really sucky:wall:

---

Yes, we have already changed the javelinman animations to make them fire and move faster. Now they can fire, retreat, turn back and fire again without being overrun by non-skirmishing infantry. After loosing all their javs, they sometimes insist in joining the melee, but with other units to protect them, I think it will work fine.

To change the speed, it's necessary to use the "fast" animations, but in most cases they are not fast enough, so we changed them.

Thank you JMRC, I didn´t know if the javelins animations were going to be redone or modified (after seeing the video of the slinger one), it is good news indeed.:2thumbsup:

I found the M2TW ones really lackluster, i don´t really know what they messed, but currently javelin troops (specially infantry) are pretty sad:sweatdrop:

Well, javelins were never much in Medieval times. I doubt they could penetrate the full plate of the later knights.

However, what about the maille of the early knights? That would take some strength I suppose, so how possible would this be?

Well javelins and other throwing weapons were still in use for footmen in the early centuries by the vikings, normans, anglo-saxons and also the welsh. There are also a few references on the use of throwing weapons by the slavics on eastern europe, as the Byzantines recorded.

They were pretty cheap weapons, with little to no training compared to the bow, and were already in use in every hunter society along with spears. The javelins also were very light and easy to carry and transport, and gave every warrior a way to defend himself from range. They were also pretty effective agaisnt armour on close range, making them pretty useful for light-equipped troops to harass slower heavy equipped ones.

The javelins were also used extensively on horse by the moors in the iberian peninsula and later the spanish who adopted these tactics from the arabs. About the armor piercing effect of the javelins, I just found this quotation.

This statement is undoubtedly derived from the Chronicles of Froissart in which the Duke of Lancaster is quoted as saying:

By my faith, of all the arms the Castilians and your countrymen make and use, I love the dart best, and love to see it used; they are very expert at it; and I tell you, whoever they hit with it, he must indeed be strongly armed, if he be not pierced through and through.

To which the duke's squire replied:
You say truly, for I saw more bodies transfixed at these assaults than I ever saw before in all my life. We lost one whom we much regretted, Senhor Joao Lourenço da Cunha, who was struck by a dart that pierced through his plates and his coat of mail and a gambeson stuffed with silk, and his whole body, so that he fell to the ground.

It must have been very poorly made armor (plate, mail and padding!) or perhaps a very strong throw from above or a horse or bad luck or....
Javelins, especially light javelins, were normally not very good penetrators (except such constructions as the pilum or soliferrum).

Mail alone was perhaps penetrated from time to time. For example Abd-al-Rahman-al-Ghafiqi was killed during the battle of Poitiers by a javelin (or, less probable, an arrow) trough his armour, but we were told that it was because of a fault, perhaps an existing gap or already weakened rings or scale.

We have English accounts about Irish use of javelins, they were not very impressed, calling it more a nuisance than a danger for armored men.

Usamah ibn-Munqidh (1095 to 1188 AD) gives some information in his interesting biography written in the late 12th century. One time his father received a wound because his mail coat was not properly closed. One time he was hit by a javelin with great force on the nasal of his helmet. The javelin was propelled away by it, just bending it and causing his nose to bleed. No penetration or unconsciousness or neck braking.

Tests of Markus Junkelmann with Roman cavalry javelins against mail show similar results: some rings (not riveted) were broken but the javelin usually would not penetrate deep enough to inflict a severe wound. Use on horse with very heavy weapons could alter things however. Some data: a thrown lance of 800 g received an energy E0 of about 58 Joule. Normally not enough to penetrate plate armor. Thrown from a galopping horse it received 210 Joule! To compare: an arrow from an 80 lbs bow received about 60 Joule (not very impressive), but a heavy arrow from an English longbow with 150 lbs received about 145 Joule. The last mentioned arrows from such strong longbows could sometimes penetrate plate armor and kill the wearer. We have accounts about this. Then a javelin from a galopping horse could probably do the same (although his construction made him worse for penetration).

Nevertheless in my opinion Senhor da Cunha was more an unlucky statistical exception. Poor boy.

Edit: it's soliferreum, not soliferrum

Weren't they using heavy steel darts by then?

I'm relatively sure that the heavier javelins would have done quite a lot of damage even to plate mail. Lighter javelins would have only been useful against padded/studded armor due to not having enough weight to increase their impact strength. A heavy javelin much like the Soliferrum thrown properly would be able to punch through plate mail.

What do you mean with plate mail? The term is new to me. Plate for me is a solid rigid form of armor, mostly made of metall (bronze, iron, steel). Mail are the funny little metall rings woven together. I think you mean what I would name plate in your post, is this correct?

The performance of plate defence depends on the quality of the material. I doubt that javelins could crack the hardened steel armor of the middle to late 15th century. In the 14th c. often softer steel or iron was used. In antiquity every quality can be found.

I don't know of tests of javelins against ancient or medieval plate armor (reconstructions). I know of a test of ballista bolts against Roman segmented armor. It was seemingly a very weak ballista, probably not correctly reconstructed, because the bolts were not able to pierce the plate considerably. This stands against ancient reports of katapeltai (which means "shield piercer") and ballista performance. Nevertheless the ballista in the test transformed presumably more power than a human thrower.

It's hard to say something reliable about javelin or arrow performance. But some things should be kept in mind: A great part of plates superior performance came from the ability to deflect points that hit even at slight angles. And the people generally did not wear uncomfortable and expensive armor because it was useless and they were fools.

By the way, it's soliferreum, I misspellt it in my post above. :sweatdrop:

Plate mail is the combination of large plates + heavy chain mail for certain areas like joints rather than going all articulated plate.

You mean like in some oriental armour, f.e. jazerants? In western armour usually such combinations did not exist but the mail was sewn or nestled to the doublet, if not a separate mail shirt was worn. I know some brigantines with mail sleeves. I have never read the term "plate mail" bevor, it's rather interesting. Is it a common term?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geala

You mean like in some oriental armour, f.e. jazerants? In western armour usually such combinations did not exist but the mail was sewn or nestled to the doublet, if not a separate mail shirt was worn. I know some brigantines with mail sleeves. I have never read the term "plate mail" bevor, it's rather interesting. Is it a common term?

---

It sounds like 'half plate' and it was indeed very common before the concept/practical use of articulated joints etc became widespread.
Full Plate as I understand was actually only in widespread use for a (relatively) short period of time before it was recognised as largely being obsolete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geala

I have never read the term "plate mail" bevor, it's rather interesting. Is it a common term?

---

I suspect it may have come from Dungeons & Dragons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elmetiacos

I suspect it may have come from Dungeons & Dragons.

---

No. Actually, plate mail was a very common type of armor among the Ottomans and their vassals. It has nothing to do with the "combination of plate and mail, DUDE!" stuff that you find in WoW and DoD. Plate mail consists of iron or steel plates connected by mail rings on the edges. It creates a flexible, yet durable form of armor that is also cheap and quick to produce. It was also used to a great extent in East Asia, especially as cheap armor for lower class soldiers in medieval Japan, and as a related armor to brigandine in China. AFAIK, it never became common in Europe outside of Turkish dominated areas of the Balkans and the lands of the Crimean Tartars.

Chairman

Ok, that is what I would call a jazerant in case of the Ottomans. But if you have to judge the defence performance of the armour, you have plate on some parts and mail on others. So it is nothing special. Any projectile on the plate parts (if they are not to small) would behave like against a plate armour. Then all is with the quality of the material.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chairman

No. Actually, plate mail was a very common type of armor among the Ottomans and their vassals. It has nothing to do with the "combination of plate and mail, DUDE!" stuff that you find in WoW and DoD.

---

The term, I mean. "Platemail" is after all, a contradiction in terms. D&D used to call practically any metallic armour something-mail "chainmail" "ringmail" "splintmail" "plate mail" were all used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_mail

Wikipedia FTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plate_mail

Wikipedia FTW.

---

https://img16.imageshack.us/img16/6113/lorica.jpg
No topic is safe from lorica segmentata!

jup, I find this kind of armour very interesting, combining the protection of rigid plate with the flexibility of mail.

However, it is totally new to me that the Roman segmented or laminated armour was embedded in mail??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geala

jup, I find this kind of armour very interesting, combining the protection of rigid plate with the flexibility of mail.

However, it is totally new to me that the Roman segmented or laminated armour was embedded in mail??

---

As I understand it, it only says that that type of plated mail resemble those types of armour in general appearance.

Yes, I understand it in the same way but I don't understand it really because it's crappy what they say. ~;)

You know what? As an EB Forumite, I propose that we raid wikipedia and remove all references to Lorica Segmentata.

What is Lorica Segmentata?
Is it perhaps some kind of mail that will be included in Europa Barb...
...okay, I'm quiet.:laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antisocialmunky

You know what? As an EB Forumite, I propose that we raid wikipedia and remove all references to Lorica Segmentata.

---

Now I know where the "antisocial" comes from... Ever thought about the other geeks, like us, but only into that crazy period so called "AD"?

You know, even thought it was in jest. I'm starting to seriously consider getting a bunch of guys together and doing that...