Are MUSKETS better than WARBOWS? Reply to Brandon F.
Shadiversity・2 minutes read
Muskets were favored over longbows in history due to their effectiveness in large-scale armies, as they could penetrate armor more effectively, cause more damage, and break enemy morale faster. While bows were cost-effective and practical, muskets offered consistent lethality, making them superior in military capacity and more impactful on enemy morale.
Insights
- Muskets surpassed longbows in warfare due to their superior penetrative power, lethality, and ability to break enemy morale faster than arrows, making them more effective in large-scale battles.
- The assumption that muskets are vastly superior to longbows in all aspects of warfare, including melee combat, is challenged by the nuanced comparison between archers and musketmen, highlighting factors like armor, weapon choice, and combat versatility that influence their effectiveness on the battlefield.
Get key ideas from YouTube videos. It’s free
Recent questions
Why were muskets favored over longbows in warfare?
Muskets were preferred due to their effectiveness in large-scale battles, surpassing longbows in the Napoleonic era. The technology of muskets advanced over time, outpacing longbows in terms of lethality and penetration. Muskets were also more cost-effective to produce and easier to manufacture compared to longbows, which required more complex processes and components. Additionally, musketeers had shorter training times than longbow soldiers, impacting their battlefield effectiveness. Overall, muskets offered consistent lethality, higher penetrative power, and the ability to cause more blood loss, making them superior in military capacity.
What advantages did longbows have over muskets in warfare?
Longbows remained cost-effective and practical for military use despite the rise of firearms. They were easy to produce, making them prevalent in medieval warfare. Arrows were reusable in battles, extending their utility and mitigating logistical challenges. Longbows varied in draw strength, leading to differing levels of lethality among archers. While muskets were superior in certain aspects, longbows had their advantages in terms of cost-effectiveness, ease of production, and variability in draw strength.
How did muskets impact enemy morale in battles?
Muskets had the ability to deliver a large amount of damage instantly, which had a significant impact on enemy morale. The high penetrative power and ability to cause more blood loss made muskets more lethal than arrows. Breaking enemy morale was crucial in winning battles, and muskets achieved this effectively by condensing damage in a single shot, causing enemies to retreat, surrender, or break faster than multiple volleys of arrows. The instant and concentrated damage inflicted by muskets had a greater psychological impact on enemy forces, making them a formidable weapon in warfare.
Were medieval archers effective in melee combat?
Medieval archers demonstrated their ability to switch from ranged to close combat effectively when necessary. While the assumption that archers would be less effective in melee combat than musketmen was challenged, factors like armor, weapon choice, and combat effectiveness played crucial roles in determining their effectiveness. Archers historically engaged in melee combat when required, showcasing their versatility in battle scenarios. The comparison between a medieval archer and a musketman in melee combat was nuanced, with various factors influencing their combat capabilities.
What challenges did traditional archery face in achieving accuracy?
Traditional archery, especially in medieval warfare, encountered challenges in achieving high levels of accuracy. Factors like arrow wobbling, inconsistent arrow weight, unbalanced arrows, and the difficulty of aiming warbows contributed to the overall difficulty in achieving pinpoint accuracy. Holding a bow steady was crucial for accuracy, especially with heavy bows, as maintaining consistency and achieving a clean release posed challenges. While some archers were exceptionally talented, the average accuracy in medieval archery was limited, making hitting human-sized targets consistently challenging at moderate distances.
Related videos
Modern History TV
What was it like to be a MEDIEVAL ARCHER?
scholagladiatoria
Are Medieval Maces BAD Weapons in Armored Combat? with @dequitem
Shadiversity
The TRUTH about BATTLEAXES!
Top Fives
15 Incredibly Effective Ancient Weapons
The Infographics Show
Insane Ancient Super Weapons You Never Knew Actually Existed
Summary
00:00
"Muskets vs Longbows: Napoleonic Era Warfare"
- Brandon F made a video on why muskets are superior to longbows, focusing on Napoleonic era warfare.
- Muskets were favored over longbows in history due to their effectiveness in large-scale armies.
- Early firearms coexisted with bows in medieval times, but musket technology advanced over time.
- Muskets phased out longbows by the Napoleonic era due to their superiority in warfare.
- Longbows remained cost-effective and practical for military use despite the invention of firearms.
- Arrows were reusable in battles, extending their utility and mitigating logistical challenges.
- Longbows were cost-effective to make and easy to produce, making them prevalent in medieval warfare.
- Muskets were complex and costly to manufacture, requiring multiple components and processes.
- Training time for longbow soldiers was longer than for musketeers, impacting battlefield effectiveness.
- Crossbows were used for their ease of use and required less training compared to longbows.
13:56
"Muskets' Superior Lethality in Military Warfare"
- Not all longbows are warbows, so assuming all longbows can penetrate armor is incorrect.
- Longbows varied in draw strength, leading to differing levels of lethality among archers.
- Warbows could reach up to 200 pounds in draw weight, but most medieval military archers shot closer to 100-220 pounds, with the average around 160 pounds.
- Muskets, with their consistent lethality and penetration, are considered superior to bows in military capacity.
- Muskets can penetrate armor more effectively than bows, causing more damage and being harder to retrieve if lodged in the body.
- Muskets' higher penetrative power and ability to cause more blood loss make them more lethal than arrows.
- Muskets' ability to condense damage in a single shot can break enemy morale faster than multiple volleys of arrows.
- Winning battles is not about killing every opponent but causing them to break, retreat, or surrender, which muskets can achieve more effectively.
- Muskets' ability to deliver a large amount of damage instantly has a greater impact on enemy morale than multiple volleys of arrows.
- While bows may be more physically demanding than muskets, fatigue is not a significant issue in battle engagements, as archers can shoot for extended periods without exhaustion.
27:24
Archers' Efficiency in Medieval Combat Techniques
- In battle, archers should take advantage of opportunities to shoot as many arrows as possible to defeat the enemy, especially during moments when the enemy is stalled or vulnerable.
- Archers should not slow down their rate of fire to conserve ammunition, as arrows can be reused, providing a significant advantage.
- The assumption that medieval bowmen would be less effective in melee combat than musketmen is challenged, as the demonstration of switching from bow to sword is exaggerated and impractical.
- The speed of switching from shooting a bow to drawing a sword is quick and efficient, making the argument for musketmen's superiority in melee combat less significant.
- The effectiveness of a bayoneted musket as a melee weapon is questioned, as it is considered an imperfect spear with limited advantages compared to a full-length spear.
- The comparison between a medieval archer and a musketman in melee combat is nuanced, with factors like armor, weapon choice, and combat effectiveness playing crucial roles.
- Archers were historically employed in melee combat when necessary, demonstrating their ability to switch from ranged to close combat effectively.
- In ambush situations, the advantage of a bow over a musket is minimal, as the noise of shooting alerts the enemy to the archer's presence.
- Accuracy in archery, particularly with traditional bows like longbows, is challenging due to factors like arrow wobbling and inconsistent arrow weight, affecting overall precision.
- Traditional archery, especially in medieval warfare, faces challenges in achieving high levels of accuracy due to factors like unbalanced arrows and the difficulty of aiming warbows.
41:34
Medieval archery: accuracy challenges and limitations
- Holding a bow steady is crucial for accuracy, especially with heavy bows, as it's challenging to maintain consistency and achieve a clean release.
- Achieving pinpoint accuracy in medieval archery was rare, with only a few archers per generation able to consistently hit a target at moderate distances, debunking the notion of universal accuracy in medieval warfare.
- Comparing the accuracy of medieval archery to musketry shows that while some archers were exceptionally talented, the average accuracy was limited, with most achieving a grouping of a certain size at around 50 meters, making hitting human-sized targets consistently challenging.
