La Hire wrote:

QUOTE:
should the lance be used in the same fashion as bows? Such as to - Allow knights with lance on horseback an attempt to make one hit in a "charge" in the early stages of a battle? Just an idea, because realistically once the knight has attacked with the lance the other knights should then commence the normal battle. Would this not be problematic to fit into the combat sequence?

I like that idea.
we have bows , why we wouldnt have lances (which will be attached as bows are now ) .
I propose to have ``one hit`` or ``charge`` with lance in battle.

1)After one hit, lance will be broken and will ``disappear `` , and knight continue ti fight with his weapon ... but lance should do a great damage to the knights, or even could kill a peasant.

2) Lance wouldnt be broken, but his price will be higher.

In my opinion, Alar and La Hire proposals and ideas are great and combined lead us to the conclusion the short-range combat should be re-think in the manner of long-range combat.

Lancers (possible to have the lance used in the same way as the bow, only in combat), 2-handers having a number of strikes like in the case of the bow.
2 - handers could have more strikes, but directed only against mounted, while lancers could hit anybody.

The battles will be more realistic, new tactics, only a few advantages in case the proposal is adopted.

Gregory I wrote:

QUOTE:
In my opinion, Alar and La Hire proposals and ideas are great and combined lead us to the conclusion the short-range combat should be re-think in the manner of long-range combat.

Lancers (possible to have the lance used in the same way as the bow, only in combat), 2-handers having a number of strikes like in the case of the bow.
2 - handers could have more strikes, but directed only against mounted, while lancers could hit anybody.

The battles will be more realistic, new tactics, only a few advantages in case the proposal is adopted.

in that case, long range combat should be splited on two parts, first bowmens, then charge of cavarly

Borna wrote:

QUOTE:
Gregory I wrote:

QUOTE:
In my opinion, Alar and La Hire proposals and ideas are great and combined lead us to the conclusion the short-range combat should be re-think in the manner of long-range combat.

Lancers (possible to have the lance used in the same way as the bow, only in combat), 2-handers having a number of strikes like in the case of the bow.
2 - handers could have more strikes, but directed only against mounted, while lancers could hit anybody.

The battles will be more realistic, new tactics, only a few advantages in case the proposal is adopted.

in that case, long range combat should be splited on two parts, first bowmens, then charge of cavarly

Is this your Idea?

Longbow archers, Shortbow archers, slingers
Lancer cavalery

But isn't it a idea for horseback archers? I mean that some knights can choose to fight the battles with only their bows(short bow) on horseback. And to be honest, I miss the crossbow in the bowlist. The longbow was used for the first time during the hundred year war between England and France, while the crossbow was a common weapon in every nation in the Medieval time.

Speaking about what miss to us, I miss my horse, Valkyrie. Died not long time ago. My life was not the same without Valkyrie and I don't have even a dog to comfort me (in the game).

The longbow was used for the first time during the hundred year war, while the dog was common long time before that. Do you think it's possible to have a dog?

Gregory I wrote:

QUOTE:
Speaking about what miss to us, I miss my horse, Valkyrie. Died not long time ago. My life was not the same without Valkyrie and I don't have even a dog to comfort me (in the game).

The longbow was used for the first time during the hundred year war, while the dog was common long time before that. Do you think it's possible to have a dog?

You are a strange man...

I gave you two dalmatians for Christs sake, and you say you don't have any? How rude!

You gave it to the Queen, you liar. She don't love dogs as much as I do, but she rather die than let me have one.

are we now talking about normal dogs or wardogs??? Because we were discussing the acceptance of (possible) new weapons

Let's not get off-topic guys k?

We aren't talking about horseback archers, which Hoern already said we won't get anyway and we aren't taking about splitting the short-range combat either. The entire debate is about the introduction of the Lance.

The Lance would be introduced as a normal weapon, such as the spear for example. It would require a horse to be used (regardless of the type of the horse) and it would be used in the short-ranged combat phase. Bows would still fire first because they are ranged.

Here's how the Lance's stats could look:

hit points: 16 (the Long Spear has hit points 14, while the normal spear has hit points 11)
reach: 280 or 300 cm (the Long Spear has 330 cm and the normal spear has 220 cm)
impact: 15 or 16 (the Long Spear has 14 impact, while the normal spear has 11 impact)
speed: 5 (the Long Spear has speed 6, while the normal spear has speed 9)
accuracy: 5 (the Long Spear has accuracy 5, while the normal spear has 9)
durability: 90 (the Long Spear has durability 90, while the normal spear has durability 50)

hands: 1

kind: long stake weapon

I figured I made a balance between the Long Spear and the normal spear, but at the same time give it a little bit more damage (hence the impact of the cavalry charge).

Waiting for other suggestions.

why not use it as a shield does?

in an example, a shield can block 50% of the arrows directed towards you. Why not let the lance have 33% of hitting a knight (from 50% to 100% damage of his chanced VP) That would make it more simpler.