Why Archers Didn't Volley Fire

Video games vs. historical tactics

• Several comments contrast Total War / Crusader Kings combat with history.
• Games often enforce rock‑paper‑scissors unit matchups; this penalizes historically plausible mixed forces (e.g., archers plus pikes) because only one unit type gets tactical bonuses at a time.
• Mods and later titles tweak this, but volleys and “arrow storms” mainly persist because the engine and cinematic expectations demand them, not because they’re realistic.

Did archers actually volley fire?

• One side argues: lack of clear textual or visual evidence for organized bow volleys, combined with the mechanics of bows, strongly suggests they were rare to nonexistent.
• Counter‑arguments say: an initial, loosely synchronized “start firing” moment is plausible, even if not the perfectly timed, held‑draw movie volley; critics see the article as not fully ruling this out.
• Others emphasize that absence of evidence isn’t definitive, but in contexts where volley‑like actions (e.g., pila, muskets) do get described, the silence on bow volleys is telling.

Practical constraints: draw weight, timing, and command

• Heavy war bows (often 100+ lb draw) make holding at full draw for more than a few seconds exhausting; reenactors report only very brief windows for staged volleys.
• Individual variation in bow power, draw length, and rate of shooting makes tight synchronization difficult.
• Pre‑modern command-and-control was coarse: you could signal “start” or “cease” fire locally, but not orchestrate frequent, battlefield‑wide timed volleys.

Continuous fire vs. volleys

• Many argue continuous, staggered fire is tactically superior: it denies the enemy predictable safe intervals to advance or reposition behind shields.
• Volleys might slightly improve the chance that someone in a formation gets hit, but at the cost of rate of fire and flexibility.

Arrows, armor, and targets

• Discussion notes that armor (even mail and light plate) and large shields significantly reduce arrow lethality, especially at range or oblique angles.
• Horses remain relatively vulnerable; disrupting cavalry by hitting mounts is repeatedly cited as a major historical role for archers.
• Agincourt is used as an example where arrows degraded and exhausted attackers rather than outright annihilating them.

Meta: style and expertise

• Some find the blog overly long, repetitive, and heavy on italics; others enjoy the “unmitigated pedantry.”
• A recurring theme is tension between lay “common sense” (shaped by media and games) and specialist historical work grounded in sources and experimental archaeology.