It was an overclaim that they do more damage, they do more against armored units, so shooting against elite units as lusted sais they will do more damage...

The pavise wasnt mounted on ones back, it was set up as a shield in front of the shooter what meant that if arrows would penetrate it thwy wouldnt do damage anyway, you didnt need a shield that stops the arrows, only one that doesnt let the fly trough.
Mounting it on the back meant death and setting it up in front of you meant you could shoot over it(do less damage)
Have you heard about any people feared for its crossbowmen when fighting people with archers(exept the chinese) only the italians, but they only were fighting nearby european states hwo also used crossbows.
The most expensive longbows are the only archer units that defeat pav.-xbows, but why not janissaries and dvor? and still you have to attack because the crossbow ammo lasts longer.
If they should beat archers, than they should cost more than the archers they beat, not less...
For the pavise spearmen the same, their shild wasnt mounted on their bodies, but on their arms, that wouldnt be unbalancing because the pavise would have guge penalties in mellee due to heaviness and that its so big...

The most funny thing with mounted crossbowmen is that they loose to bedouin camel archers in missile, but win against vardariotai.
Also them having more ammo(yes more ammo, their ammo lasts longer and I think mounted crossbows dont fire slower) and being fast makes them killing machines...

@TosaInu, yes, maybe I have understood him wrong... I still think the exeptions of the "general public" are wrong.

L :)