Quote Originally Posted by Bladebolt View Post
Well... no...

Until gun powder came into use ranged was NOT the primary combat style or the decisive factor in the end result.
Any shield could save you from arrows and a lot of armors could really negate most of the damage that an arrow would inflict. Archers were the support group.

I still can't accept the concept that in DDO an archer can shoot unlimited arrows that each one does 2000-3000 hp damage in a crazy pace, doing more damage per second than any other melee class.

So if you are talking about the all human history before the 15th century you are not correct.

Last but not least who authorized you to speak for Chuck Norris? (and not even use caps when typing His name?)
Blasphemy should not be tolerated.
Sorry, about continuing to necro a 3-4 year old thread, but I had to stop this absurd misunderstanding of history.

Range weapons - especially the bow, have been key to the outcomes of many wars and battles.

Bows were key to the Assyrian empire. They were important to the English and their war with the French.

They were vital to the success of the Huns. The bow was primary. They were the primary weapon of the Mongols as well. They made mince meat of melee forces and the old style Roman legions.

You are right that it was not the most popular. Success with the bow required a lot of skill. Most armies didn't have the time or interest in building the skill which was necessary to use a bow effectively. Even the crossbow required quite a bit of skill to use effectively.

This is why guns changed warfare. You had the ability to give someone a missile weapon that would be effective with almost no training. Grab the farmers, hand them a gun and you got an "effective" fighting force. At least, more effective than the spear and shield you were handing them.