english
Ex Member
|
I practise both slinging and archery, but I have to say that it is far easier to get accuracy and train someone quicker with a bow. Round 1: Sling:0 Bow:1 However, slingers can carry far more ammunition, and so can last out longer campaigns. Sling:1 Bow:1 Arrows must be constantly tended and maintained. Stones are easy to find anywhere, whilst glandes need a lot of preparartion; if a slinger is desperate, he can just pick up some nice rocks. Of course, an archer cannot do this. Sling:2 Bow:1 An archer can shoot faster than a slinger; although many will disagree, a highly trained archer can shoot off many more arrows than a slinger can stones in one minute. Sling:2 Bow:2 A bow can break easier, and will wear out, whereas a sling will not. 3 - 2 I think a self bow's range can be very big; think longbows. A composite bow's range can be enormous (350+ METRES!). A sling can probably out range a bow, but the slinger needs to be very very strong, and the sling needs to be very good. 3 - 3 A bow can be used in a more cramped environment than a sling, and can be used better in woodland. 3 - 4 The bow can also be lethal in more places than a sling, due to barbed heads (although there are many accounts of lead sling bullets, in use by the romans, being shot into flesh and not being able to be pulled out. This could be lethal, naturally, due to infection.) 3 - 5 A sling can be carried in a pocket or pouch and does not get in the way. 4 - 5 A sling is not an extra weight to be carried when fatigue sets in in an army. 5 - 5 Similarly, enormous carts are not required to transport ordinance, whereas there are tales of ammunition for archers requiring vast amounts of preparation and transport. Naturally, the same is not true of the sling. 6 - 5 Anyone else want to add anything? It looks like the sling might win the contest. Of course, it depends what you want the weapon for.
|