I believe you have very much extrapolated from what I said there. I was talking about a situation where the crossbowman does not have any immediate threats, not in a 1 vs 1 situation against infantry, I'm not sure which part of what I wrote caused that to pop up. What you have said is still valid for your specific scenario, an archer does have a far better chance to survive than a crossbowman against a single target gunning for them but once again, that is not close to what I was talking about.
Ahh, I'm sorry, I've read you as "we become the major targets for crossbowmen (as they) do not need to worry about approaching cavalry or other infantry.".
Onto your second point, WPF & PD does not even come close to catching up to the missile speed, not even slightly, besides that, crossbowmen are still able to put in their own wpf, which I would assume, if one increases the missile speed, the other would too, therefore the PD speed up would make bugger all difference, to put it bluntly. (Oh, and then there is the effective WPF decrease with the higher PD, which means that it would offset it more.)
Comparatively, that missile speed is a total of 18 higher than that of a longbow, a hunting crossbow, the "worst" of the lot, has as much speed as a masterwork longbow, the highest missile speed bow on the market.
Iirc it is quite clear that you have to aim quite a bit higher with a bow than with a crossbow of comparable level. Which probably means missile speed is lower as well. What I'm saying is that this also would require quite some testing to get accurate numbers.
For example if PD increases missile speed by 1/3rd of it's damage increase, that would increase longbow speed to 50 something at 6 PD. Which is a speed difference of 12% instead of outrageous 50% compared to the arbalest (crossbows can only improve reload and accuracy). Well like I said, I am also saying that from memory and it may never have applied, or not apply anymore.
Theoretically the crossbow should be used at longer ranges for their higher projectile speeds, but given the map set ups that we have, they don't need to be across the other side of the map as there is a sort of "gravity" towards points where the two bulks of the armies will fight giving a wide range of different targets to hit.
Well, as you need enough cover to reload (and distance sort of increases the area your cover ... uhm covers) you can be very well sitting a long way away from the battle. What range anyone finds reasonable is personal preference, what actually works well in practice for any class is dependent on a number of factors (the accuracy stat or damage dropoff for example) of which not all are really quantifyable (this discussion about tactical range for one thing).
In any case, I'm just saying this to add some points and because there's a big tedency on this forum to just find some stats or anecdotes (or just make them up for all I know) and use them for whining and lobbying, and ignore everything else (not against you).
And in any case, archery is going to be nerfed again.
Poll