Your so called facts are not accurate.
Longbows had better rof, dealt less damage and have problems with penetration, even against good mail.
You also underestimate recurved bows.
Give me the sources of an Hungarian type Bow with equal or more than 120Lbs of draw tension.
For your other arguments, please watche the following vids as awnsers :
Piercing test of Longbows in thick plate armor :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxsTo note, ancient warbows were up to 180Lbs of draw pressure, not 100lbs as shown on the vid. (A maximum of 210Lbs was reported, couldn't found my sources to prove, sorry).
Also, they used high modern steel for the plate,... ancient hammered steel was not that efficient.
That's not stupid to say that in mediavel conditions, the arrows would make more than two holes....
Piercing test on Mail :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4gPgHyaG1Q&feature=channelAs said before, the bows are not as powerful as those used and the steel of the mail is better than was used. But even like that, the arrows penetrate the male without problem. (Have to say also that, in this test, they used riveted mail,... in the XII Century, those kind of mail was only for rich Lords..)
Longbow VS Crossbow ROF test :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HagCuGXJgUs&feature=channelBoth weapons were heavier in terms of drawing strenght but you can still see my point...
Huns's horse archery effectiveness (and High ROF) example :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yorHswhzrU&feature=relatedBut this is no aimed shots, they are instinctive ones, still 12 Shots in 17Sec is fuckin' impressive.
That's for my "unaccurate" facts.
Talking about Crossbows, I read someone say that crossbows were not able to pierce Plate armor, that made me laught a lot !
With 220-240Lbs of draw tension (300 for some modern was XBow (yeah, we still use xbow in military operations...) they had no problem in piercing any kind of armor.
That's also why X-Bows were prohibitated by Vatican Laws during nearly 300years in medieval Europe,.. what's the point of war if any peasant could take a X-Bow and take down an heavy armored Knight as easy as that ??
So, Archery is too efficient ? Well, as one of the most old weapons ever created and with 15'000 of years of evolution if it's not efficient, what's the point !???
Leave archers alone and take a Shield if you don't want to get shoot.
POST SCRIPTUM :
Sorry I forget to laugh about 2H !
Actually they weren't (or very few and only in some countries) any sharpened two hand swords found. That's for one simple reason... two and swords were not made to kill but to brake awlpike lines.... yeah, that's not as epic as Aragorn Charging 10'000 orcs but that's our ancients did...
The only two hand weapons used were Axes, 1 and a half swords, Francisques, pikes, lances and Halbards (and some more but they were to many cultures to right about every one).
The closest to two hand swords used in melee fight were the Japanese Najinat or the Swiss Zweihander (used only in rotation attacks by Celtic peoples).
As always, if you give sources that says otherwish, I'm ready to ready (and certainly to laugh about,.. but still....)
