• rumschlumpel@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    The biggest advantage of bows in a gun setting would be stealth, can’t shoot what you don’t know is there. Makes the superhero stuff a bit difficult, though.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      43
      ·
      4 months ago

      But what if you put a boxing glove on your arrow? Surely that would help

          • isles@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yep, that’s what the linked articles’ conclusion was. But 80dB vs 120dB is a huge difference, jackhammer compared to a dishwasher. Anyway, I’m out of my depth, I shot a bow last 30 years ago. And never as a stealthy assassin nor archery-based superhero.

            • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              TIL the movies lied to me! I vividly remember John Rambo stealth-killing a camp of enemy fighters with a bow.

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        “easier to use” shouldn’t really matter for Particularly-Good-At-Archery-Man. It’s not like a bow is a particularly slow weapon, either (medieval archers were probably doing about 10 shots per minute), and you don’t really need the additional power of crossbows - medieval war bows were able to kill armored knights, they were pretty much only limited by the archer’s strength. Whether you need high power pretty much depends on the setting - if you’re mostly fighting against human thugs who maybe wear a protective vest you don’t need extremely high draw strength. If the setting is more fantastical, why WOULDN’T “particularly good at archery” include absurdly strong muscles that make the additional power of crossbows unnecessary?