Hello ranger’s apprentice fandom can we talk real quick about the stupidest thing Flanagan ever wrote
It’s about the bows. Yanno, the rangers’ Iconique™️ main weapon. That one. You know the one.
Flanagan. Flanagan why are your rangers using longbows.
“uh well recurve arrows drop faster” BUT DO THEY. FLANAGAN. DO THEY.
the answer is no they don’t. Compared to a MODERN, COMPOUND (aka cheating) bow, yes, but compared to a longbow? Y’know, what the rangers use in canon? Yeah no a recurve actually has a FLATTER trajectory. It drops LATER.
This from an article comparing the two:
“Both a longbow and a recurve bow, when equipped with the right arrow and broadhead combination, are capable of taking down big game animals. Afterall, hunters have been doing it for centuries with both types of bows.
However, generally speaking and all things equal, a recurve bow will offer more arrow speed, creating a flatter flight trajectory and retain more kinetic energy at impact.
The archers draw length, along with the weight of the arrow also affect speed and kinetic energy. However, the curved design of the limbs on a recurve adds to its output of force.”
It doesn’t actually mention ANY distance in range! And this is from a resource for bow hunting, which, presumably, WOULD CARE ABOUT THAT SORT OF THING!
Okay so that’s just. That’s just the first thing.
The MAIN thing is that even accounting for “hur dur recurves drop faster” LONGBOWS ARE STILL THE STUPID OPTION.
Longbows, particularly and especially ENGLISH longbows, are—as their name suggests—very long. English longbows in particular are often as tall or taller than their wielder even while strung, but especially when unstrung. An unstrung longbow is a very long and expensive stick, one that will GLADLY entangle itself in nearby trees, other people’s clothes, and any doorway you’re passing through.
And yes, there are shorter longbows, but at that point if you’re shortening your longbow, just get a goddamn recurve. And Flanagan makes a point to compare his rangers’ bows to the Very Long English Longbow.
Oh, do you know how the Very Long English Longbow was mostly historically militarily used? BY ON-FOOT ARCHER UNITS. Do you know what they’re TERRIBLE for? MOUNTED ARCHERY.
Trust me. Go look up right now “mounted archery longbow.” You’ll find MAYBE one or two pictures of some guy on a horse struggling with a big stick; mostly you will actually see either mounted archers with RECURVES, or comparisons of Roman longbow archers to Mongolian horse archers (which are neat, can’t lie, I love comparing archery styles like that).
Anyway. Why are longbows terrible for mounted archery? Because they’re so damn long. Think about it: imagine you’re on a horse. You’re straddling a beast that can think for itself and moves at your command, but ultimately independently of you; if you’re both well-trained enough, you’re barely paying attention to your horse except to give it commands. And you have a bow in your hands. If your target is close enough to you that you know, from years of shooting experience, you will need to actually angle your bow down to hit it because of your equine height advantage, guess what? If you have a longbow, YOU CAN’T! YOUR HORSE IS IN THE WAY BECAUSE YOUR BOW IS TOO LONG! Worse, it’s probably going to get in the general area of your horse’s shoulder or legs, aka moving parts, which WILL injure your horse AND your bow and leave you fresh out of both a getaway vehicle and a ranged weapon. It’s stupid. Don’t do it.
A recurve, on the other hand, is short. It was literally made for horse archers. You have SO much range of motion with a recurve on horseback; and if you’re REALLY good, you know how to give yourself even more, with techniques like Jamarkee, a Turkish technique where you LITERALLY CAN AIM BACKWARDS.
For your viewing enjoyment, Serena Lynn of Texas demonstrating Jamarkee:
Yes, that’s real! This type of draw style is INCREDIBLY versatile: you can shoot backwards on horseback, straight down from a parapet or sally port without exposing yourself as a target, or from low to the ground to keep stealthy without banging your bow against the ground. And, while I’m sure you could attempt it with a longbow, I wouldn’t recommend it: a recurve’s smaller size makes it far more maneuverable up and over your head to actually get it into position for a Jamarkee shot.
A recurve just makes so much more SENSE. It’s not a baby bow! It’s not the longbow’s lesser cousin! It’s a COMPLETELY different instrument made to be used in a completely different context! For the rangers of Araluen, who put soooo much stock in being stealthy and their strong bonds with their horses, a recurve is the perfect fit! It’s small and easily transportable, it’s more maneuverable in combat and especially on horseback, it offers more power than a longbow of the same draw weight—really, truly, the only advantage in this case that a longbow has over the recurve is that longbows are quicker and easier to make. But we KNOW the rangers don’t care about that, their KNIVES use a forging technique (folding) that takes several times as long as standard Araluen forging practices at the time!
Okay.
Okay I think I’m done. For now.
81 notes
·
View notes
Ok so it looks like ship charts have been going around and not too long ago, I made my own cause I noticed the other one didn’t have a lot of the characters and I wanted one that did. I finally finished adding my own lines tonight (I also added Comeau, Jason Kim, Sandra and Monique cause I forgot to add them when I originally made this) so here’s my easy to digest opinions on the different ships!
Don’t feel offended if your OTP isn’t a top pairing for me and it’s in something like ��it’s ok’. I respect that you like it, its just not my thing. if it’s a ship you hate in one of the top spots, well be respectful please and thank you :]
Also if I forgot a ship, I’m sorry it didn’t cross my head while making this. Just tell me which one and I’ll respond with what line I would have put.
(Blanks and the different layers under the cut cause my god its a mess)
Also bonus logoless version if you want it :D
Ok bye! Have fun making your own with my blanks if you want to, just link to this post or credit me if you do please and thank you ;]
8 notes
·
View notes
im sorry if this comes off weird. in your post about how tumblr doesnt celebrate women, a true post, you said "even the women here are men" but also said "not in a trans misogynistic way", which is a fair save but... thats not really worded inclusively at all. because it did look like you called all non-trans women trans people "men that are women" 😭 if you fixed that already im so sorry that tumblr doesnt update that across reblogs. I know it was a mispeak, no worries. just pointing it out. hopefully not to exhaustion here.
i apologize if it wasn’t worded inclusively enough! i love trans women and they are included in the point of the post (women being ignored in favor of cishet men) a) i said “even the women you TALK about here are men” I was very much referring to fandom spaces. b) i do think it’s a little strange that my post has to be worded for inclusivity? like. i would hope people would have enough brain cells to rub together to know that. the guy that goes by any pronouns and repeatedly has made many posts about loving trans women would not be talking about them.
there is not really an inclusive way to say “misogyny is so ingrained in queer/leftist spaces that the only time they talk about women anymore they are talking about men.” because no matter how i say it, someone isn’t going to be happy with that. even if i specifically say cishet they will accuse me of being transphobic towards their blorbos (cishet men) it is an easy bypass. to accuse someone of being a terf for simply.... pointing out that it’s weird the only woman people talk about is. gerard way.
also sometimes.... inclusivity is the problem. like im not trying to be mean but the reading comp/immediate jump to bad faith reading problem on this site is TERRIBLE. you really read me saying what was essentially shorthand for “this doesn’t apply to transfemmes, trans misogyny is another conversation that goes hand and hand with this one” and send me an ask about how i (person under trans flag, surrounded by trans women) didn’t address this issue nicely enough and might as well have said all trans women are men? very sorry to say that says more about how you view trans women than anything else. like. what is genuinely more important to you? i genuinely think i might be better off talking to walls at this point.
11 notes
·
View notes