Javelins and History

[LordK9]

I'm fairly well read in history and I've never heard of javelins being a good weapon against armor. Elephants, yes, but not armor. Think about it - their force is entirely from arm motion and even primitive bow arrows (like the Indians in what is today Florida used against the initial Spanish soldiers) had little affect. Do you think the game designers wanted more variance in weapons so made them into armor killers and (possibly) overpowered the peasant bowman? You know, a playability thing? Any ideas of other reasons?

[drone]

First page of googling actually gives an Org M2TW thread. https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showt...Armor-Nonsense

MTW doesn't specify the type of armor when running the kill calculation. Against chainmail, I imagine javelins would do a decent job, the mass of the javelin would enable it to split the rings at the point. Against plate they are probably fairly useless.

[LordK9]

So, from reading that line, I guess my guess was correct - the game wouldn't be fun if were absolutely accurate. Nitpicking but, maybe a better term then armor piercing would have been armor affective weapons. I had to laugh at that lawn dart thing, though :)) - one can penetrate the steel foil of a car with a screwdriver or even a heavy knife.

[huth]

It's just difficult to make all those complicated cause-effect kind relations in pretty much limited game. Especially in such old game like Medieval 1...
In one of the most realistic mods out here - Europa Barbarorum for Rome it also couldn't be possible and it came to interesting situation that units with AP are like some special forces against armoured foe, especially general bodyguards. Though it is nicely balanced(and not that stupid that cav lances doesn't have bonus but tiny hachet has) and such splitting for the "hold the line" and "shock" units is very good for gameplay, but it still seems odd. In Rome and Med2 there is also "lethality" stat and it's also very important in EB, but AP bonus is still kind of unbalanced, but also just needed, otherwise amoured units would be killers, and it's probably not possible to balance everything without AP.
It'd be great if engine could render something like this: Roman legionary has gladius. Let say 20% of his actions is slashing, 40% is stabbing and 40% is shield bashing and other unconventional moves. And all this actions also should have a different percentage of effect, depends on eg. experience and training. But slashing would be very good vs lightly armoured troops and the less the better is armour, stabbing would be good also vs armour(but not plates... and it's another factor - armour types) and other moves would be good for decreasing defence and incapacitating enemy. So a normal unit is a bit AP killer, but not that much... Unfortunatelly it's not possible in engine :P

But on javelins... in Med1 there are few kinds of throwing weapons and if they all have AP bonus, it is odd, but it could be easily changed. Anyway a heavy pilum-style or throwing spear should be definately AP, though I'm curious if it could pierce plate armour... Chainmail easier(it's not very good agains't piercing), and i think padded coat beneath it too, because of it's weight? Not sure, even more interesting is how it'd do against linothorax, multi-layered heavy glued linen was very good in stopping arrows, but heavy javelin? Though it was for piercing shields if I remember correctly, so... Plate armour is hard to pierce by awl pike style weapon in melee, so maybe a flying piercing missile couldn't do better... Don't know if the speed of falling down gives bigges momentum/weight than human muscles...

[drone]

The MTW battle engine has separate AP modifiers, one for melee and one for missiles. In a more complex engine, bonuses/penalties based on weapon vs. armor type would be possible. I remember AD&D (1st ed) had this extensive capability, even though it was cumbersome to use in a tabletop game.

For the record, here are the vanilla MTW missile stats for comparison:
Javelins - 0.15 accuracy, 2 lethality, 2 power, 0.3 armor modifier
Bonnacht spear - 0.15 accuracy, 4 lethality, 2 power, 0.3 armor modifier
Longbow - 0.6 accuracy, 0.68 lethality, 1 power, 0.5 armor modifier
Dart - 0.3 accuracy, 1 lethality, 1 power, 1 armor modifier
Arbalest - 0.75 accuracy, 1.25 lethality, 3 power, 0.3 armor modifier
Crossbow - 0.7 accuracy, 1 lethality, 2 power, 0.4 armor modifier
Bow - 0.6 accuracy, 0.68 lethality, 1 power, 1 armor modifier

Javelins have the same AP as arbalests, which is probably overkill, combined with the power factor and they can really be lethal to expensive units like knights for cost. They are such a pain to use though, maybe the devs wanted to reward players who could micro jav units properly. Irish darts could probably use a little AP...

[LordK9]

Its the power thing that bugs me; speed (mainly) and weight should be the primary factors. I'd think more like .35 for the javelin as speed would be quite low. Playability is a huge issue for any game and making them somewhat overpowered allows for early game armor defense (at least, that is still what I think). Whatever; the game is good!

[drone]

My understanding is that the power number determines the hit points lost on a successful wound roll, so it's basically how nasty the damage is. With a leaf blade style head, I don't really have a problem with the damage of the javelin, but combined with the AP against mounted armor it gives unrealistic results.

[LordK9]

Its always a guess with me on how a game works: I was thinking power as how hard it hit so my prior comments now makes little sense :) I am probably assuming wrong too on AP - was thinking of it as a measure of penetration. Do you think the unrealistic result is needed, though, for playability? I'm still unsure at this point. I've done fine against armor in early game using mainly spearmen. I think I'd been happy using them as the Greeks and Romans did, as skirmishers - running between the armies hurling their javelins (the Romans had one last hurl as their frontline swordsmen also would hurl a few javelins as the enemy closed) usually at other missile troops (keeping them away from the primary troops) and possibly fighting with enemy javelin troops until they scampered behind their own troops as the enemy closed in. Then watching the fun until needed on the flanks. In game, they're used more like tank destroyers (mounted knights were the medieval version of tanks, IMO).

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Engine limitations I suspect.

Armor is not of a piece. There are, as we know, vast differences in the missile shedding/missile deterrent abilities of chain mail over padding with gothic "proofed" plate. Yet TW generally treats them as "armor."

Modern studies have suggested that the quality of alloys available would have made "AP" a much less frequent characteristic for missiles than it is in any of the games.

[Yesugey]

I'm fairly well read in history and I've never heard of javelins being a good weapon against armor. Elephants, yes, but not armor. Think about it - their force is entirely from arm motion and even primitive bow arrows (like the Indians in what is today Florida used against the initial Spanish soldiers) had little affect. Do you think the game designers wanted more variance in weapons so made them into armor killers and (possibly) overpowered the peasant bowman? You know, a playability thing? Any ideas of other reasons?

Hey mate, I am not an expert, but I think you are wrong. I've seen inmany movies that the javelinmen throws javelin with huge force, to the longer distance than in the game, and with deadly accuracy.

Think of a javelinmen in the olympics. (I don't remember the name of the sport though) Think how deadly they throw the javelin, and how it thrust to the sand. I think a guy from olympics can manage to pass the armor.

I will google or youtube to find out if MythBusters or any other crazy people ever tried this ^_^

[caravel]

I've seen inmany movies that the javelinmen throws javelin with huge force, to the longer distance than in the game, and with deadly accuracy.

I've also seen this in movies...

Think of a javelinmen in the olympics. (I don't remember the name of the sport though) Think how deadly they throw the javelin, and how it thrust to the sand. I think a guy from olympics can manage to pass the armor.

A well thrown javelin might cause fatal injury to someone wearing a link mail shirt, but I can't see it being much use against plate armour - it would have to be a very lucky throw to be lethal.

I think you have to look at the technology of the time - and look at how war has been made since day one. If javelins were that effective against armour, they would have been in much wider use at the time. The arbalest was a good armour piercing weapon - the longbow's effectiveness is still open for debate. Arbalests also had range on their side - i.e. you could hit charging cavalry from a safer distance. Javelins had to be carried into battle in very limited numbers, thrown at close range and then the thrower would be forced to fight hand to hand.

Units like Jinetes would also have the added speed of the horse to add to the force of the throw - thus they should be deadlier (In S/MTW units obviously don't shoot/throw while on the move, but this should probably be taken into account via changes to stats (as it is for horse archer accuracy)).

In terms of gameplay I would say that the javelin should not be AP as it contributes to making it quite overpowered in the hands of the player. The AI is not very good with javelins as it struggles with disabling skirmish mode (the AI will disable skirmish for such units, but only when they are facing a weakened unit in a melee or have been forced into a melee.). While the AI javelin units have remaining missiles they are very unlikely to stand their ground and get in a good volley. Javelins in fact add very little value to an AI army stack and it's very easy for the player to ride them down and use them to trigger chain routs.

I seem to remember that gollum messed with javelins a lot in his mod, but eventually came to the conclusion that they were best removed as they're impossible to balance. Of course if you don't really care about balance, then none of this is an issue...

[Yesugey]

I've also seen this in movies...

Hehe, well, the movie makers has advisors, and they probably learned it from historians. Also, historians do researches and tests about these stuff.
I remember a perfect example: Few years ago I watched a documentary about "How is it possible to use bow from a chariot?" To find out, they built an Egyptian Chariot with the best historical accuracy possible, and tried it themselves. The results were so suprizing: Even an unskilled archer can use bow with very good accuracy from a Chariot.

I think the javelins might be the same. Javelin is so heavy, I think with a sharp point made with iron, it can penetrate the armor.

But of course you have to use the speed of horse & running to get this force. The game engine is not able to show it, but we assume that they do while playing.

And you are totally right about the game balance issue, I also like to not care, when it comes to reality of the game.

Anyway, wish we can bet on it, for a beer

[caravel]

Hehe, well, the movie makers has advisors, and they probably learned it from historians.

Movie makers, make whatever sells, not what's historically accurate. Yes there are historical advisers, but there is also a lot of poetic licence and a lot of choreography to make hand to hand combat and the abilities of the fighters more interesting to the viewer. Movies are made to sell after all, not to educate.

Also, historians do researches and tests about these stuff.

They do and you'll find that as time has gone on, much of the myths surrounding certain weapons have been debunked as "only fit for the cinema"...

I remember a perfect example: Few years ago I watched a documentary about "How is it possible to use bow from a chariot?" To find out, they built an Egyptian Chariot with the best historical accuracy possible, and tried it themselves. The results were so suprizing: Even an unskilled archer can use bow with very good accuracy from a Chariot.

Of course, but like the movies, popular history documentaries are mainly aimed at sensationalism. If they're purely educational there is a fear that too few people will watch them - and TV is all about ratings and advertising revenue. I'd say it would be easier to fire a bow from a chariot than from horse back anyway...?

I think the javelins might be the same. Javelin is so heavy, I think with a sharp point made with iron, it can penetrate the armor.

A javelin only has the strength of the arm of the person throwing it. An arbalest is incredibly powerful by comparison (it uses a windlass so energy is stored up). I'm not sure whether a javelin would cause much more than a dent - with a heavy javelin like you say, the blunt trauma would probably be more effective than any armour piercing effect.

[drone]

I don't really know much about the history of medieval javelins, but is there any mention of the use of amentums or atlatl-like devices in the time frame? An atlatl can get a javelin close to 100 mph at the release point. Not too shabby considering the mass.

[Yesugey]

A javelin only has the strength of the arm of the person throwing it. An arbalest is incredibly powerful by comparison (it uses a windlass so energy is stored up). I'm not sure whether a javelin would cause much more than a dent - with a heavy javelin like you say, the blunt trauma would probably be more effective than any armour piercing effect.

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

I make the quick research, and wikipedia says "Some types of them can penetrate armor, even specialized for it". For example, Roman "Pilum" was heavy enough. In fact, pictural evidences shows that soldiers tie heavy balls, etc. to their javelin to increase penetration skills.
Also, Greeks uses Peltast against Spartans. (Which are the heaviest armoured soldiers of their age)

You may say "It was older age, the armor quality changed." I agree. But penetrating armor with javelin is quite possible, like in the total War series.