phalanx

[keravnos]

What is not clearly evident is a common mistake, I used to make myself.

Do NOT compare the heavy mongol and turkic bows of Medieval times to the scythian bow that the archers at EB are using. The hunnic bow, which itself is inferior to the Mongol/Turkic bow was only beginning to be used in the steppes over China.

In reality with the bows that Achaimenid Persians had they would have to approach very close to be able to do any real damage in which case the psiloi/akontistai/sphendonetai would make short work of them. If they would be used from further on, they wouldn't have much of an impact, ESPECIALLY ON A PIKE PHALLANX. Let me see, Bronze helmet with facemask, Linothorax (which tests have shown to be VERY arrow resistant), pteruges, and greaves. Add to that the sarissai pike wall. Which part of the body exactly is prone to arrows? Just the hand holding the pike.

Sphendonetai/slingers could outshoot the bow. Any hit would count as it would cause blunt damage. This is accurately translated to EB as well. Foot archers have another disadvantage. The number of bows they carry is smaller than the lead shots that the sphendonetai did.

Surena managed to destroy the Romans because he had extra arrows carried on nearby camels. Any units whose arrows were depleted, would return, refill their gorytoi/bow+arrows combined case and head back to the front with arrow supply replenished. The Pahlavan HA were shooting arrows at the Romans from midday until the last light of day. According to Tarn, this was a revolutionary development, and one for which Surena isn't given enough credit.

Take all these into account you will find why the favorite Achaimenid Persian missile weapon was the heavy javelin, NOT the arrow. Pahlavan, as they were Nomads were of course more arrow friendly than the sedentary Achaimenid Persians.

[raenor]

What is not clearly evident is a common mistake, I used to make myself.

Do NOT compare the heavy mongol and turkic bows of Medieval times to the scythian bow that the archers at EB are using. The hunnic bow, which itself is inferior to the Mongol/Turkic bow was only beginning to be used in the steppes over China.

In reality with the bows that Achaimenid Persians had they would have to approach very close to be able to do any real damage in which case the psiloi/akontistai/sphendonetai would make short work of them. If they would be used from further on, they wouldn't have much of an impact, ESPECIALLY ON A PIKE PHALLANX. Let me see, Bronze helmet with facemask, Linothorax (which tests have shown to be VERY arrow resistant), pteruges, and greaves. Add to that the sarissai pike wall. Which part of the body exactly is prone to arrows? Just the hand holding the pike.

Sphendonetai/slingers could outshoot the bow. Any hit would count as it would cause blunt damage. This is accurately translated to EB as well. Foot archers have another disadvantage. The number of bows they carry is smaller than the lead shots that the sphendonetai did.

Surena managed to destroy the Romans because he had extra arrows carried on nearby camels. Any units whose arrows were depleted, would return, refill their gorytoi/bow+arrows combined case and head back to the front with arrow supply replenished. The Pahlavan HA were shooting arrows at the Romans from midday until the last light of day. According to Tarn, this was a revolutionary development, and one for which Surena isn't given enough credit.

Take all these into account you will find why the favorite Achaimenid Persian missile weapon was the heavy javelin, NOT the arrow. Pahlavan, as they were Nomads were of course more arrow friendly than the sedentary Achaimenid Persians.

I agree with keravnos. Good sound logic there ^^

If you could get close to a Phalanx and shoot a flat trajectory then you could do some damage but in reality this would hardly have happened. Thats what light cavalry and other missile troops are for, to keep the enemies missile troops away. It would be very rare (and stupid) to have just a phalanx in battle with no support.

From a far distance the bowmen would be firing in a parabolic trajectory to reach the phalanx while keeping their distance from the other missile troops. This greatly decreases the stopping power of an arrow and also gives more of a chance to be hit by a pike/helmet/shoulder guards (as keravnos stated). From such a distance even with a direct hit the arrow may, as a result of the reduced stopping power, not even be able to penetrate linothrax or metal cuirass (sp).

anyway my 2c

[Intranetusa]

So the conclusion is that western & Persian bows just sucked and lacked the power of the later
recurve-composite bows that came from Central & East Asia...

[Pontius Pilate]

So the conclusion is that western & Persian bows just sucked and lacked the power of the later
recurve-composite bows that came from Central & East Asia...

yes. that pretty much sums up the whole argument on this thread, or at least the latter part.

[artavazd]

What is not clearly evident is a common mistake, I used to make myself.

Do NOT compare the heavy mongol and turkic bows of Medieval times to the scythian bow that the archers at EB are using. The hunnic bow, which itself is inferior to the Mongol/Turkic bow was only beginning to be used in the steppes over China.

In reality with the bows that Achaimenid Persians had they would have to approach very close to be able to do any real damage in which case the psiloi/akontistai/sphendonetai would make short work of them. If they would be used from further on, they wouldn't have much of an impact, ESPECIALLY ON A PIKE PHALLANX. Let me see, Bronze helmet with facemask, Linothorax (which tests have shown to be VERY arrow resistant), pteruges, and greaves. Add to that the sarissai pike wall. Which part of the body exactly is prone to arrows? Just the hand holding the pike.

Sphendonetai/slingers could outshoot the bow. Any hit would count as it would cause blunt damage. This is accurately translated to EB as well. Foot archers have another disadvantage. The number of bows they carry is smaller than the lead shots that the sphendonetai did.

Surena managed to destroy the Romans because he had extra arrows carried on nearby camels. Any units whose arrows were depleted, would return, refill their gorytoi/bow+arrows combined case and head back to the front with arrow supply replenished. The Pahlavan HA were shooting arrows at the Romans from midday until the last light of day. According to Tarn, this was a revolutionary development, and one for which Surena isn't given enough credit.

Take all these into account you will find why the favorite Achaimenid Persian missile weapon was the heavy javelin, NOT the arrow. Pahlavan, as they were Nomads were of course more arrow friendly than the sedentary Achaimenid Persians.

Were these types of javelins still being used in EB's timeframe? if yes I havent seen any type of heavy javelin used in the east (by Armenians, or mercenaries of the east)

[Ibrahim]

Were these types of javelins still being used in EB's timeframe? if yes I havent seen any type of heavy javelin used in the east (by Armenians, or mercenaries of the east)

I think he means any big javelin, not necessarily a pilum type, or soliferum. and from what I know about Achaemenid warfare, they did indeed prefer javelins, at least in the cavalry arm.

[artavazd]

I think he means any big javelin, not necessarily a pilum type, or soliferum. and from what I know about Achaemenid warfare, they did indeed prefer javelins, at least in the cavalry arm.

Yes, but were these big javelins being used in EB's timeframe? and if yes will they be javelins with like an ap attribute?