You know there are threads dedicated to fire arrows…not this one…but ok:joy:
1 Like
But that’s the wrong thread!
Go on here please:
Lol
Good lucking wounding anyone at or beyond that range unless they’re completely unarmored.
(ldsjflskd)
I answer here:
I don’t see any answers, just you ignoring my post where i said that’s from where they were burning Skalice to the ground NOT engaging an enemy army.
1 Like
can you give me an example of this?
2 Likes
I mean if you think about it, logically. If you have a skirmish, 50v50 on a open field then Sure some soldiers would want to ‘flank’ the enemy and end up fighting without a ‘front line’. Just because they march in formation doesnt mean they would always stay in formation.
If you have a battle of 50.000v50.000 the center is kinda forced to stay in formation, because they cant go anywere. Depending on the discipline and orders of the soldiers in the sides they might not always stay in formation.
If the frontline is broken at some point a then you need to reform your formations and line. Those orders barely reach the soldiers who are fighting in the brawl.
Would a fight end up like on a tv show where the lines have completely broken and both armies have merged together? Depends on the commanders, discipline of soldiers, duration of battle, pushes made by either party. But most likely not, also depend on which timeframe we are looking at, romans would consider the line lost and send the reserves forward to push the enemies back and regain ground. Perhaps medieval armies did fight like that.
How does this relate to KCD? Most likely we have small skirmishes with AI made for one on one perhaps two on one combat. Your not going to get a neat line as with, for example a roman legion. The fighting style is different between a medieval force and the roman meat grinder.
The difference is that other people point out things in the game that aren’t historical, while you make threads about things historically inaccurate things that are clearly not in game. Your fire arrows thread used and old video of KCD that had no fire arrows in it as the only proof of fire arrows in KCD. This present thread uses a video which very clearly shows two things: a small skirmish (in which strict line formation would not necessarily be adhered to) and, importantly, the military side stays in formation the whole time, while the bandits/Cumans sometimes flank.
I don’t know that anyone is saying that you are wrong about fire arrows not being used in battle or line formations being maintained in large battles - everyone is saying that these are not issues present in any of the game footage you’ve provided. I could start a thread with the video on lockpicking and say “cars were not present in this time period!!”, but that would be idiotic because the video shows no evidence of cars being in the game.
1 Like
Jaakari:
Other thread for fire arrows please. There were fire arrows at 0:20 in the video. You can clearly see the tip of the arrow burning:
I see what you mean…but I don’t know if they are arrow trails…or fire arrows
I’m unconvinced that this shows fire arrows - the old arrow style had a ‘tracer’ effect which has been removed, as you can see in newer videos. At least now I can see what you were talking about, so I will certainly concede that point (I honestly couldn’t see anything in there that looked like fire arrows before), though it appears to me to be the old tracer effect.
1 Like
@Flarius here still keeps ignoring that fire arrows in this video are not used against an enemy but to burn down Skalice (town) as @SirWarriant mentioned several times.
1 Like
I’m not ignoring it. I’m just not commenting on it. That’s a difference.
As I said, the tip is burning.
I’m not forced to reply to his statement.
You see, my thoughts were like that:
Even if those fire arrows are used to burn down Skalice, they were apparently still uncommon in this period of time. It seems that there wasn’t a big struggle, they could just have stormed the city and then burned it to the ground with torches, which would have been much cheaper.
I just didn’t feel like discussing this anymore. I didn’t keep on pushing my point. I just corrected obvious mistakes like Jaakari’s statement that there are no fire arrows in the video.
But if you’re so eager to keep on discussing, we can do that.
What repeats again and again?
All I did was correcting Jaakari on his statement that there are no fire arrows in the video, which is clearly wrong since there are fire arrows in the video.
My tip is burning…but probably in a different way:joy: ( sorry I couldn’t resist )
1 Like
Two words: Artistic License
It’s a game, so obviously the devs want to create a sense of drama and intrigue. Not everything is going to be historical fact. Where that diverges from the narrative they wish to portray, no doubt they will take such licenses to display things in a manner they deem more appropriate or fitting for the story.
Historical fiction my friend.
1 Like