| 1 | Horse archers may be awesome, but they are not the end-all or a game breaker - at least against enemies who know how to counter them. Ranged units in general are historically often overrated: English longbowmen could not have won any battle of Hundred Years War on their own with just arrows. Missile harassment was useful for disordering enemy formations, but the actual killing happened during hand-to-hand combat (where a disordered formation was more vulnerable). This is due to one simple fact: armour is not useless. In fact, against the relatively weak bows of horse archers, even cloth armour (gambeson) can be counted on to reliably stop arrows. At the same time, horse archers themselves have to use short bows which are outranged by the longer bows (and later also crossbows) used by their infantry counterparts. As a result, if infantry has sufficient missile troops, horse archers will lose the exchange - as Romans proved after adapting to Parthian cavalry tactics. |
| 2 |
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/context.php
FollowingContext Analysis / HorseArcher
Go To
- Show Spoilers
- Night Vision
- Sticky Header
- Wide Load
