Age of Warriors weaponry question

[Maalii]

I was wondering about the weaponry used in AOW. Among other things, I wonder about the the lack of a bow and quiver on all the major warriors except for Du Kyung Seung. At the time of RTK, about 1000 years earlier in China, archers were ubiquitous in battles and nearly all (if not all) major warriors had a bow and quiver in addition to their favorite weapon. In Japan, at this time, nearly all (if not all) the major warriors carried their sword and a bow and quiver (for example, such as described in the Heike Monogatari, which takes place at about the same period as AOW).

[mikey]

Well, I’ve wondered, too. Remember the Yi Ui-Bang death scene, where it seemingly takes Chung Kyun’s forces all day to finally bring him down? Remember how, after hours of struggle (and the death of dozens of Kyun’s soldiers) one of Kyun’s generals suggests something like “Shall we bring in the archers?”

Well, *duh!* Even a moderately skilled archer could have put one right through Ui-bang’s forehead at the range they were holding him. But, I guess there wouldn’t have been much drama if they’d done that, right?

It seems almost indisputable that any army staffed with skilled archers would have had an enormous advantage over other troops, if only for their ability to knock off the opposing forces’ generals from a distance (I seem to recall, in “Emperor Wang Guhn,” how the generals on both sides almost always seemed to command the battlefield situation from a safe distance – perhaps for that very reason).

I can only guess that the lack of archers in AOW helps bring out the kind of heroic, one-on-one kind of fighting that seems so dramatic. But I agree, it’s probably not flawlessly accurate from the historical view.

[paintballphil1978]

i agree........if they were all to have bows, then there would be no need for lots of hand to hand combat......plus, most of the fights (from what i've seen, im a newbie) are usually between 2 people or a small group..... i havent seen an all out war, but im looking foward to it

[SirOwnzAlot]

The Chinese were known for heavy use of the bow. The military doctorine centered around it. They even invented this rapid fire crossbow called the Cho Ku Nu.

The Samurai had bows. Longbows to be exact. Those were fired from long distances in the begining of the battle to kill stuff from insane distances. Then infantry would engage in melee combat.

The lack of archers, if you look at history is because of geography. Koryo was mountainous and forrested, thus rendering limited use of the bow. Hence the infantry based armies. Archers would only appear in large open battles.

[Master Archfiend]

its pretty sad to see the normal soldiers get tossed around like items. The show focuses on the generals and the regular soldiers are portrayed as property and gets beat on and tossed by the generals. And they keep coming out of nowhere...geeze...lol

All these normal soldiers deaths...wouldnt it decrease the population..lol

[Maalii]

Guest-Master said:

its pretty sad to see the normal soldiers get tossed around like items. The show focuses on the generals and the regular soldiers are portrayed as property and gets beat on and tossed by the generals. And they keep coming out of nowhere...geeze...lol
All these normal soldiers deaths...wouldnt it decrease the population..lol

In common with most warrior epics, the ordeals of the common soldier are generally overlooked as the plot movers are the generals and political figures. The same applies to epics such as LOTR where thousands of nameless warriors fall in the various films. To focus on the common soldier in the manner of some movies (e.g., Platoon, Apocalypse Now, Deerhunter, etc) probably wouldn't carry the core historical thread of a historical drama as well as focusing on the leaders. That having been said, I think AOW seems to illustrate the suffering of the civilian population more than the usual historical/warrior epic (a notable exception would be the Japanese drama on the period of time that featured Ashikaga Yoshimasa and the Onin War) .

As far as population reduction through wars, the historical records of most countries demonstrate that warfare did indeed kill off a signficant fraction of the population. For example, as stirring as the Romance of the Three Kingdoms epic is, the sobering footnote is that the population of China was reduced to something like 1/4 of what it had been during the peak of the Han Dynasty. Most of the deaths were probably of civilians from famine and disease related to war, but the deaths of soldiers probably contributed mightily to the overall decline in population. The censuses (if believable) at the close of RTK times suggest that over 10 percent of the population were soldiers, so the slaughtering of many of them in bloody wars certainly directly affected the population.

[Maalii]

SirOwnzAlot said:

The lack of archers, if you look at history is because of geography. Koryo was mountainous and forrested, thus rendering limited use of the bow. Hence the infantry based armies. Archers would only appear in large open battles.

Hmmm I wonder if the terrain really accounted for the lack of archers. Japan is every bit as mountainous and densely vegetated as Koryo (one could actually argue it is more mountainous based on the higher average elevations of the mountain ranges there). Many of the ambush scenes using bowmen in RTK occur in wooded, hilly or mountainous areas. In fact several ambushes portrayed in AOW occur in such areas. Without actually knowing the details, I would suspect that archers were no less common in Koryo then in neighboring Asian countries. What I wonder, though (assuming that there were in fact groups of footsoldiers as archers in each army), is whether the officers of Koryo themselves carried a bow as standard armament (in addition to their favorite individual weapon)--they are certainly shown practicing their marksmenship a lot. The bow is such a central part of warrior legends in the neighboring countries. Again, to compare with the RTK legend, of the major warriors that are killed or wounded in action in RTK, I'd guess at least half are killed or wounded as a result of an arrow (whether this mirrors actual historical fact is another question). There are some spectacular individual combat scenes in RTK involving the use of the bow (my favorite is when arrowless Jiang Wei dodges Guo Huai's shot at him and grabs it out of the air, then loads it in his own bow, fires it back at Guo and kills him). It seems that both mass combat and individual combat scenes in AOW would be more interesting with more common use of archery.

[TheIceTiger]

yea one thing confuses me is taht krung dea sung and chief huh have alot of scens of them practicing their archery skills but never even seem them use it. I guess killing someone with a bow just isn't the same as bashing someone skull with a club or an ax.(that reminds me of how funny yi ui bang iron club is, so small and still so powerful ;D)

[Chung Kyun]

lol i remember when yi ui-bang hit a monk with the iron club.the monk was like hi im the leader of the monks and y ui-bang just hit him on the head.the monk died fast.

[SirOwnzAlot]

Terrain has everything to do with battle. Sun Tzu wrote a whole chapter about it in the Art of War.

Acutually 4/5ths of Japan is mountainous. Not all Samurai carried bows. There was no standard armanent at the time. Weapons were up to preference.

Koryo and Japan had limited used of the bow because of terrain. Especially when compared to other armies. Here are some examples.

The Mongols. Wide open space of the steepes. EVERY Soldier was mounted, and most were archers.

The English. Insane heavy use of the Longbow. England has plains and rolling hills. 6 foot long bow. 3 foot long arrows. Has an acurate range of 300 yards. Could penetrate most armor.
Infact the middle finger came from the English. This happened whenever the English captured a French archer, they would cut off his middle finger and his thumb. Thus they could not draw their bow. The English would then taunt the enemy by flipping them off with their middle finger and thumb.

[Maalii]

SirOwnzAlot said:

Terrain has everything to do with battle. Sun Tzu wrote a whole chapter about it in the Art of War.
Acutually 4/5ths of Japan is mountainous. Not all Samurai carried bows. There was no standard armanent at the time. Weapons were up to preference.
Koryo and Japan had limited used of the bow because of terrain. Especially when compared to other armies. Here are some examples.
The Mongols. Wide open space of the steepes. EVERY Soldier was mounted, and most were archers.

Rugged terrain is not an impediment at all for use of archery. On the contrary, mountainous, wooded terrain provides ideal places for lethal use of concealed archers in ambushes. This is because there are still plenty of openings for line of sight (and fire) while there are abundant places to conceal troops in positions where they are within easy killing range of the enemy. In AOW this was illustrated in at least one ambush of Ui Min by the West Capital rebels and General Chung's ambush and crushing of Mang Yi's revolt. In RTK the death of Shu strategist/general Pang Tong (aka the Young Phoenix) in an ambush by massed archers in a densely wooded mountain valley is one classic example, as is the similar death of the great Wei warrior Zhang He in a similar setting.

As for samurai armament, it is important to distinguish the armament of officers (i.e. samurai) from common foot soldiers, some of whom were spearmen, others of whom wielded lances, etc., and did not carry bows. If you read the descriptions of samurai in the Heike Monogatari, which describes the Minamoto-Taira war from 1180-1185 (similar time as AOW) you will not find a single description of a samurai (and there are lots of such descriptions) that does not include a bow and quiver, in addition to their other 'standard' armament of their long and short swords. This armament probably changed later. By the late 1500's (during the period of warring states that ended with the ascendancy of the Tokugawa shogunate), firearms were introduced and samurai armaments may have been more varied as the bow lost its place as the main kill-at-a-distance weapon. Maeda Toshiie is depicted as having preferred a spear as his main weapon in combat, for instance (in addition to swords, of course).

[SirOwnzAlot]

It was an impediment when you look at others who had unlimited use of the bow.

AOW and RTK are bad examples considering the accuracy of the battles. Such as the Generals fighting off dozens of guys alone.