New Civilizations (2nd Era, OOC, Always Open )

[Joohan]

Hey G, could you remind me of the details regarding your repeating crossbows? How they are designed, draw weight, bolt head type all that jazz? I'm doing some research for an upcoming post and those are going to be an important point.

Well, there are three different types, first off - though they all follow the same broad principle of a latch-trigger crossbow with reciprocating action. The two heavier variants are multiple-latch, which is the key to the repeating nature. Fundamentally, they operate with an overhand goat-foot lever action, built into the frame, which catches and then moves the bowstring down a series of roll-locks. The crossbowman essentially 'pumps' the lever action to move the bowstring down the roll-locks to the nut-lock, the final stage, where the trigger controls release. The only difference between the variants is the number of roll-locks (and thus the draw weight), and the sturdiness of the composition.

A light cavalryman's crossbow, designed to be used from the saddle or in maritime circumstances, will only have a single roll-lock, the nut-lock itself, and doesn't have a draw-weight greater than what a trained soldier can use - 60-80 lbs, depending on manufacturing tolerances. Crossbows like that will categorically shoot more of a broadhead than a penetrative tip, being designed for use against unarmored or lightly armored targets. Perhaps one shot in two will hit at an angle to cut through padded armor or common mail, but that draw weight has no hope against any sort of neatly forged plate, even iron plate.

Heavier infantry crossbows work on two additional roll-locks, and use heavier bowstrings, bringing their draw weight up into the range of 350-400 lbs. That'll increase the fatigue from firing them, and marginally decrease their speed of use, but the higher draw weight allows them to throw a heavier bolt further and with far more lethal intent. Only decently put together iron plate will have a shot at resisting such an impact, or very well riveted mail, though steel plate and a combination of layered armors will still largely be immune.

I'm a bit confused here. My post is going to detail some new training events in our BCT regime, and intend to use some repeating crossbows in that - specifically, modeled after Imperial designs.

In researching crossbows, there's something about your design I don't understand. The Zhuge crossbow ( as I understand it being the influence behind the repeater ), didn't a have roll-lock - instead, the nut being simply a small well carved into the stock which caught the string. The arrow was loosed when the lever was brought back fully, a small sliding lug nut was pushed up into the notch, freeing the drawstring. There was no trigger on the Zhuge. A rolling nut requires a trigger to operate.

It's actually your use of the word roll-lock and nut-locks which has me the most confused. As I understand it, the nut merely holds the drawstring, called a roller-nut on account of the nut rolling on a sear ( or an axle ). What does any of that have to do with increasing the draw strength of the bow?

I intended on implementing shields to the Icedonian soldier's armory, and was wondering at the power of these crossbow. I know you've said that your designs are more powerful than the historically pathetic chinese IRL varients - but how? I tried finding a reason for why the Chinese never increased the draw strength of Zhuge, something scientific, but the only explicit thing I could find was an obscure reddit comment, essentially, " because the repeating crossbow is designed to be pulled back with one hand, it's draw strength is massivly reduced, when compared to other designs which had you pulling with both hands and a foot. ".

So, how is it that the imperial variant of the repeater is so much heavier than the IRL design?

[Orostan]

Well, there are three different types, first off - though they all follow the same broad principle of a latch-trigger crossbow with reciprocating action. The two heavier variants are multiple-latch, which is the key to the repeating nature. Fundamentally, they operate with an overhand goat-foot lever action, built into the frame, which catches and then moves the bowstring down a series of roll-locks. The crossbowman essentially 'pumps' the lever action to move the bowstring down the roll-locks to the nut-lock, the final stage, where the trigger controls release. The only difference between the variants is the number of roll-locks (and thus the draw weight), and the sturdiness of the composition.

A light cavalryman's crossbow, designed to be used from the saddle or in maritime circumstances, will only have a single roll-lock, the nut-lock itself, and doesn't have a draw-weight greater than what a trained soldier can use - 60-80 lbs, depending on manufacturing tolerances. Crossbows like that will categorically shoot more of a broadhead than a penetrative tip, being designed for use against unarmored or lightly armored targets. Perhaps one shot in two will hit at an angle to cut through padded armor or common mail, but that draw weight has no hope against any sort of neatly forged plate, even iron plate.

Heavier infantry crossbows work on two additional roll-locks, and use heavier bowstrings, bringing their draw weight up into the range of 350-400 lbs. That'll increase the fatigue from firing them, and marginally decrease their speed of use, but the higher draw weight allows them to throw a heavier bolt further and with far more lethal intent. Only decently put together iron plate will have a shot at resisting such an impact, or very well riveted mail, though steel plate and a combination of layered armors will still largely be immune.

I'm a bit confused here. My post is going to detail some new training events in our BCT regime, and intend to use some repeating crossbows in that - specifically, modeled after Imperial designs.

In researching crossbows, there's something about your design I don't understand. The Zhuge crossbow ( as I understand it being the influence behind the repeater ), didn't a have roll-lock - instead, the nut being simply a small well carved into the stock which caught the string. The arrow was loosed when the lever was brought back fully, a small sliding lug nut was pushed up into the notch, freeing the drawstring. There was no trigger on the Zhuge. A rolling nut requires a trigger to operate.

It's actually your use of the word roll-lock and nut-locks which has me the most confused. As I understand it, the nut merely holds the drawstring, called a roller-nut on account of the nut rolling on a sear ( or an axle ). What does any of that have to do with increasing the draw strength of the bow?

I intended on implementing shields to the Icedonian soldier's armory, and was wondering at the power of these crossbow. I know you've said that your designs are more powerful than the historically pathetic chinese IRL varients - but how? I tried finding a reason for why the Chinese never increased the draw strength of Zhuge, something scientific, but the only explicit thing I could find was an obscure reddit comment, essentially, " because the repeating crossbow is designed to be pulled back with one hand, it's draw strength is massivly reduced, when compared to other designs which had you pulling with both hands and a foot. ".

So, how is it that the imperial variant of the repeater is so much heavier than the IRL design?

In the next post one of the most significant bits of military technology I was going to start using was a crossbow which had a handle on the bottom. You'd pull that handle back and it would pull back the crossbow's string. The handle would then click into place and a bolt would be loaded. The trigger would be a little spring loaded lever with a block on one end that'd fall into notches as you pulled back on the handle to ready the weapon. By pulling the trigger you would pull the block away from the notches on the handle and let the weapon be fired. It'd strain the arms and you'd have to bring the handle back when it was braced against your shoulder though.

I don't know how similar that is to what G-Tech wants to be doing, but that's what I plan to do and maybe I described what G-Tech was trying to say in simpler language.

[UniversalCommons]

If I make biogas can I make bombs? Completely bypass gunpowder. Basically if I can capture biogas from anaerobic digestion of manure in pits, I would have a highly explosive substance. It might be both too dangerous and too crazy. I was thinking that we would use biogas for lighting, heating, forges, and cooking initially. It would be used like it was used in Mesopotamia to heat hot water for the baths. I would imagine that it might be turned into a canister weapon for catapults and ballistae.

[Joohan]

I'm a bit confused here. My post is going to detail some new training events in our BCT regime, and intend to use some repeating crossbows in that - specifically, modeled after Imperial designs.

In researching crossbows, there's something about your design I don't understand. The Zhuge crossbow ( as I understand it being the influence behind the repeater ), didn't a have roll-lock - instead, the nut being simply a small well carved into the stock which caught the string. The arrow was loosed when the lever was brought back fully, a small sliding lug nut was pushed up into the notch, freeing the drawstring. There was no trigger on the Zhuge. A rolling nut requires a trigger to operate.

It's actually your use of the word roll-lock and nut-locks which has me the most confused. As I understand it, the nut merely holds the drawstring, called a roller-nut on account of the nut rolling on a sear ( or an axle ). What does any of that have to do with increasing the draw strength of the bow?

I intended on implementing shields to the Icedonian soldier's armory, and was wondering at the power of these crossbow. I know you've said that your designs are more powerful than the historically pathetic chinese IRL varients - but how? I tried finding a reason for why the Chinese never increased the draw strength of Zhuge, something scientific, but the only explicit thing I could find was an obscure reddit comment, essentially, " because the repeating crossbow is designed to be pulled back with one hand, it's draw strength is massivly reduced, when compared to other designs which had you pulling with both hands and a foot. ".

So, how is it that the imperial variant of the repeater is so much heavier than the IRL design?

In the next post one of the most significant bits of military technology I was going to start using was a crossbow which had a handle on the bottom. You'd pull that handle back and it would pull back the crossbow's string. The handle would then click into place and a bolt would be loaded. The trigger would be a little spring loaded lever with a block on one end that'd fall into notches as you pulled back on the handle to ready the weapon. By pulling the trigger you would pull the block away from the notches on the handle and let the weapon be fired. It'd strain the arms and you'd have to bring the handle back when it was braced against your shoulder though.

I don't know how similar that is to what G-Tech wants to be doing, but that's what I plan to do and maybe I described what G-Tech was trying to say in simpler language.

There are simpler and easier technologies to use for your trigger, rather than a spring. As little as it seems, actually making wire turns out be a very time intensive task.

[Joohan]

If I make biogas can I make bombs? Completely bypass gunpowder. Basically if I can capture biogas from anaerobic digestion of manure in pits, I would have a highly explosive substance. It might be both too dangerous and too crazy.

I have no idea how you would do it... you'd have to pass it by me on the exact specifics of the method which you propose.

[Orostan]

In the next post one of the most significant bits of military technology I was going to start using was a crossbow which had a handle on the bottom. You'd pull that handle back and it would pull back the crossbow's string. The handle would then click into place and a bolt would be loaded. The trigger would be a little spring loaded lever with a block on one end that'd fall into notches as you pulled back on the handle to ready the weapon. By pulling the trigger you would pull the block away from the notches on the handle and let the weapon be fired. It'd strain the arms and you'd have to bring the handle back when it was braced against your shoulder though.

I don't know how similar that is to what G-Tech wants to be doing, but that's what I plan to do and maybe I described what G-Tech was trying to say in simpler language.

There are simpler and easier technologies to use for your trigger, rather than a spring. As little as it seems, actually making wire turns out be a very time intensive task.

That’s true. Maybe I’ll have the block be more held with a wooden bit to the lower part of the weapon than be pushed into it by a spring. The trigger could just be moving that wooden bit out of the way and allowing the block to fall.

[Joohan]

There are simpler and easier technologies to use for your trigger, rather than a spring. As little as it seems, actually making wire turns out be a very time intensive task.

That’s true. Maybe I’ll have the block be more held with a wooden bit to the lower part of the weapon than be pushed into it by a spring. The trigger could just be moving that wooden bit out of the way and allowing the block to fall.

You could use a roller nut design, which is considerably easy to make

[Europa Undivided]

Posted.

TL:DR

1. Barbarians have been spotted near the borders of Vostoslavia by the network of watchtowers, prompting them to warn the nearby Kolochin and Skalev tribes to a possible incursion.

2. Vostoslavia had been enticing villages and towns into joining with promises of food security, trade inclusion, protection, and good governance, to moderate success.

3. It's winter.

4. (Will be edited later) Volgagrad is doing its own things in the south.

[Orostan]

That’s true. Maybe I’ll have the block be more held with a wooden bit to the lower part of the weapon than be pushed into it by a spring. The trigger could just be moving that wooden bit out of the way and allowing the block to fall.

You could use a roller nut design, which is considerably easy to make

I will for sure, though probably first on ballistae. I think the first versions of the chinese repeating crossbow should be test versions, and that the roller nut will have its place on a production model of the repeating crossbow.

[Joohan]

You could use a roller nut design, which is considerably easy to make

I will for sure, though probably first on ballistae. I think the first versions of the chinese repeating crossbow should be test versions, and that the roller nut will have its place on a production model of the repeating crossbow.

You probably should look up the Zhuge crossbow. As I stated above, it doesn't use a roller-nut because it can't use one.

[Orostan]

I will for sure, though probably first on ballistae. I think the first versions of the chinese repeating crossbow should be test versions, and that the roller nut will have its place on a production model of the repeating crossbow.

You probably should look up the Zhuge crossbow. As I stated above, it doesn't use a roller-nut because it can't use one.

Yeah I was thinking of how a nut would work on this. It'd have to make the device a bit more complex.

The way I was thinking of a repeating crossbow originally was a bit more complex than the Zhuge crossbow, but it would probably be better at firing more powerful shots. I think the mechanism of the real repeating crossbow would be much easier to produce in large quantities, so the version of the weapon I had in mind will probably be an officers only weapon or something given to a soldier for exceptional performance while something a lot closer to the real weapon is issued to the usual soldier.

[Joohan]

You probably should look up the Zhuge crossbow. As I stated above, it doesn't use a roller-nut because it can't use one.

Yeah I was thinking of how a nut would work on this. It'd have to make the device a bit more complex.

The way I was thinking of a repeating crossbow originally was a bit more complex than the Zhuge crossbow, but it would probably be better at firing more powerful shots. I think the mechanism of the real repeating crossbow would be much easier to produce in large quantities, so the version of the weapon I had in mind will probably be an officers only weapon or something given to a soldier for exceptional performance while something a lot closer to the real weapon is issued to the usual soldier.

When you do think of the full design, run it by me.

[Orostan]

Yeah I was thinking of how a nut would work on this. It'd have to make the device a bit more complex.

The way I was thinking of a repeating crossbow originally was a bit more complex than the Zhuge crossbow, but it would probably be better at firing more powerful shots. I think the mechanism of the real repeating crossbow would be much easier to produce in large quantities, so the version of the weapon I had in mind will probably be an officers only weapon or something given to a soldier for exceptional performance while something a lot closer to the real weapon is issued to the usual soldier.

When you do think of the full design, run it by me.

This is a poorly made MS paint representation of what I was trying to describe. I hope all the parts are distinguishable. The idea is a guy pulls back on the handle and brings the back of the handle thing over a wooden block that keeps it in place. During this the trigger will jiggle a little bit because of the block's lever. As the handle is pulled back it also pulls on another lever that lets only one crossbow bolt drop into a firing position. I imagine from this something very much like the real repeating crossbow could be created by simplifying the whole thing.

[Joohan]

When you do think of the full design, run it by me.

This is a poorly made MS paint representation of what I was trying to describe. I hope all the parts are distinguishable. The idea is a guy pulls back on the handle and brings the back of the handle thing over a wooden block that keeps it in place. During this the trigger will jiggle a little bit because of the block's lever. As the handle is pulled back it also pulls on another lever that lets only one crossbow bolt drop into a firing position. I imagine from this something very much like the real repeating crossbow could be created by simplifying the whole thing.

By handle, do you mean drawstring?

I think what you are describing sounds a lot like the zhuge. It's very simple, but the draw back is that it has very weak hitting power ( like, probably wouldn't kill an unarmored person ). Historically, this was overcome by dipping the bolt tips in dung or some kind of poison.

[Orostan]

This is a poorly made MS paint representation of what I was trying to describe. I hope all the parts are distinguishable. The idea is a guy pulls back on the handle and brings the back of the handle thing over a wooden block that keeps it in place. During this the trigger will jiggle a little bit because of the block's lever. As the handle is pulled back it also pulls on another lever that lets only one crossbow bolt drop into a firing position. I imagine from this something very much like the real repeating crossbow could be created by simplifying the whole thing.

By handle, do you mean drawstring?

I think what you are describing sounds a lot like the zhuge. It's very simple, but the draw back is that it has very weak hitting power ( like, probably wouldn't kill an unarmored person ). Historically, this was overcome by dipping the bolt tips in dung or some kind of poison.

Yes, the handle is attached to the drawstring. I looked up a video of how the zhuge worksand this seems to me like a little more complex version of it. I think it'd also probably be a bit more powerful on account of not having to draw the string back the way the zhuge does, but because of the added complexity and the scale of arming an army with these sorts of things I was going to basically build the zhuge and reserve this slightly more complex version for trying to kill lightly armored enemies with the actual bolt instead of any poison.

An automatic version with a crank that repeats this process also might be fun to produce.

[Ah-eh-ioh-uh]

Hey Joohan , Gtech seems like they maybe have too much on their plate. Can you help me out? Trying to be patient but.... It's been some time since I posted in the IC.

[Orostan]

Hey Joohan , Gtech seems like they maybe have too much on their plate. Can you help me out? Trying to be patient but.... It's been some time since I posted in the IC.

Both of them are doing other stuff and have real life priorities. If you want to keep trading with Hana's civilization I'd advise that you just keep descriptions of relations vague and try to make it look like you're not worth conquering to them.

If you don't want to do that and think being in Japan isn't working for you, China has a lot of free real estate.

[Joohan]

By handle, do you mean drawstring?

I think what you are describing sounds a lot like the zhuge. It's very simple, but the draw back is that it has very weak hitting power ( like, probably wouldn't kill an unarmored person ). Historically, this was overcome by dipping the bolt tips in dung or some kind of poison.

Yes, the handle is attached to the drawstring. I looked up a video of how the zhuge worksand this seems to me like a little more complex version of it. I think it'd also probably be a bit more powerful on account of not having to draw the string back the way the zhuge does, but because of the added complexity and the scale of arming an army with these sorts of things I was going to basically build the zhuge and reserve this slightly more complex version for trying to kill lightly armored enemies with the actual bolt instead of any poison.

An automatic version with a crank that repeats this process also might be fun to produce.

The string on the zhuge was brought back via a lever. How is your handle different?

[Joohan]

Hey Joohan , Gtech seems like they maybe have too much on their plate. Can you help me out? Trying to be patient but.... It's been some time since I posted in the IC.

Whatcha need bud?

[Orostan]

Yes, the handle is attached to the drawstring. I looked up a video of how the zhuge worksand this seems to me like a little more complex version of it. I think it'd also probably be a bit more powerful on account of not having to draw the string back the way the zhuge does, but because of the added complexity and the scale of arming an army with these sorts of things I was going to basically build the zhuge and reserve this slightly more complex version for trying to kill lightly armored enemies with the actual bolt instead of any poison.

An automatic version with a crank that repeats this process also might be fun to produce.

The string on the zhuge was brought back via a lever. How is your handle different?

The lever doesn't carry the whole magazine, and the handle doesn't require the large motion that a zhuge lever requires to pull the string back. It requires a stronger motion, but that's because stronger strings can be used in this than in the zhuge due to the straight motion.

[Joohan]

The string on the zhuge was brought back via a lever. How is your handle different?

The lever doesn't carry the whole magazine, and the handle doesn't require the large motion that a zhuge lever requires to pull the string back. It requires a stronger motion, but that's because stronger strings can be used in this than in the zhuge due to the straight motion.

The zhuge was easier to pull back on because it had a very weak draw weight - a necessary feature, because you had to be capable of pulling the string quickly and with one hand.

If you could fine me an IRL example of your idea, then i'll probably allow it.

[Orostan]

The lever doesn't carry the whole magazine, and the handle doesn't require the large motion that a zhuge lever requires to pull the string back. It requires a stronger motion, but that's because stronger strings can be used in this than in the zhuge due to the straight motion.

The zhuge was easier to pull back on because it had a very weak draw weight - a necessary feature, because you had to be capable of pulling the string quickly and with one hand.

If you could fine me an IRL example of your idea, then i'll probably allow it.

https://youtu.be/tbKGjRoSofA?t=64

This is probably the closest in mechanism that I could find. It's sort of like a semi-auto version of what this guy is showing off. It also looks like it could use a string with a stronger draw weight.

[Ah-eh-ioh-uh]

Hey Joohan , Gtech seems like they maybe have too much on their plate. Can you help me out? Trying to be patient but.... It's been some time since I posted in the IC.

Whatcha need bud?

Marcio and some people were heading north to Hanajima to see about establishing trade amongst other diplomatic relations? Hanafuridake left the rp just as I was revealing myself and waving hello so to speak... Gtech seems busy and as I've said before, don't want to play with myself (not in a dirty way, meaning taking control of an npc civ and be called a cheater). Been waiting some time for an answer.

[G-Tech Corporation]

I'm a bit confused here. My post is going to detail some new training events in our BCT regime, and intend to use some repeating crossbows in that - specifically, modeled after Imperial designs.

In researching crossbows, there's something about your design I don't understand. The Zhuge crossbow ( as I understand it being the influence behind the repeater )

Ah, that's my mistake. There's really nothing that the Imperial repeater has in common with a Zhuge crossbow save an homage to the loading system - I've just honestly been too busy to correct any false assumptions.

didn't a have roll-lock - instead, the nut being simply a small well carved into the stock which caught the string. The arrow was loosed when the lever was brought back fully, a small sliding lug nut was pushed up into the notch, freeing the drawstring. There was no trigger on the Zhuge. A rolling nut requires a trigger to operate.

All absolutely true, and not pertinent to the repeater's design. A trigger is necessary to get functional value out of a high draw-weight weapon, otherwise you're essentially using an unwieldy compound bow which must be held at full extension for aiming and timing, and that would negate the value of the crossbow as a weapon that can be used by a lightly trained soldier.

It's actually your use of the word roll-lock and nut-locks which has me the most confused. As I understand it, the nut merely holds the drawstring, called a roller-nut on account of the nut rolling on a sear ( or an axle ). What does any of that have to do with increasing the draw strength of the bow?

That's my own terminology, but both mechanisms would technically be best understood as roll-nuts - the roll-locks being a design that releases with the action of the lever-arm to allow the bowstring to be drawn further back, temporarily locking the bowstring in place for the backswing of the lever, while the nut-lock is the conventional roller-nut, which locks the bowstring in at the end of the spanning process and is controlled by the trigger itself.

The increase in draw strength comes purely from that combination of factors - factors which allow the operator to go through multiple operations of the lever-arm before the weapon is ready to fire. It is a simple matter of greater storage of energy - a Zhuge crossbow can only fire with the translated energy of a single arm motion, whereas heavier repeaters are essentially 'pumped up' through the stages of the roll-locks, storing greater energetic potential in the bowstring than would be possible with a single motion. Think of the process as analogous to, say, inflating a tire; a single stroke action of the pump will impart only minor pressure to the air within the tire, but multiple actions allow for a more impressive result.

Functionally repeater crossbows are only limited by the ability of their construction to contain the energy of the higher draw-weight and the fatigue they exert on the crossbowman as he must move the lever-arm back and forth multiple times to span the weapon against a higher tensile resistance.

I intended on implementing shields to the Icedonian soldier's armory, and was wondering at the power of these crossbow. I know you've said that your designs are more powerful than the historically pathetic chinese IRL varients - but how? I tried finding a reason for why the Chinese never increased the draw strength of Zhuge, something scientific, but the only explicit thing I could find was an obscure reddit comment, essentially, " because the repeating crossbow is designed to be pulled back with one hand, it's draw strength is massivly reduced, when compared to other designs which had you pulling with both hands and a foot. ".

So, how is it that the imperial variant of the repeater is so much heavier than the IRL design?

In terms of shielding, there isn't much an arrow or bolt of any weight can do against a shield. As long as the shield possesses sufficient material toughness to prevent complete penetration which, if memory serves, even a humble oak/fir device will stop a 150 lb warbow with minimal penetration, a soldier whose shield is impact is fairly safe. The biggest risk is repeated impacts cracking or shattering the shield, which is much more of a problem than most media portray - but again, those arrows busy destroying a shield are in a very good place for the combatant compared to those arrows hitting his personal armor.

The biggest drawback of a shield is always weight. The lightest shields, of wicker and hide, could be completely punched through by even regular warbows, and won't do much to stop a crossbow, save the lightest repeaters. Heavier wooden shields will stop even high draw-weight crossbows, but will probably splinter or crack into uselessness within a half dozen impacts, or even less. Iron or steel coated bucklers would be the most resilient option, but of course putting together something like an iron-plated tower shield for full coverage would make your soldiers impractically overburdened. Most medieval forces split the difference at wooden shields reinforced with metal rims to try and minimize crack propagation in the wooden medium itself.

It should also be noted that, apparently, our best preserved Zhuge crossbows come from 'home defense' designs and lighter models that civilians used, with Chinese sources speaking of heavier variants that haven't come across the years to us. Not that I'm particularly prone to assumptions about ahistorical matters, but worth noting.

Anyway, as explained above, the essential increase in power comes from allowing the wielder to impart more energy to the crossbow than the single fluid action of the Chinese repeating model - that's what the addition of the multiple actions and trigger are necessary for.

[Saxony-Brandenburg]

tfw im about to make history by discovering the zamzam well