im actually back matt, i never left, i read the thread all the time at school but i finally connected ethernet back up to my desktop so i can post once more
Tristan was under the impression you just idled off. He'll probably add you back, now that you're posting again.
and were matchlocks really that much in use by now? in all seriousness, the matchlock mechanism by this point was way outdated, and i feel most self-igniting weapons were wheellock (c. 1505 AD) or flintlock (c. 1610 AD)
I don't think its just as easy as to re-arm entire armies with the latest firearm, which in and of itself is probably pretty damn expensive. For example, I still have a lot more Arquebusiers than I do musketeers, but it's not to the point that musketeers are too uncommon. The main reason is because, well, Musketeers got double the pay, as according to an excerpt from Wikipedia I just read.
The initial role of the musket was as a specialist armour piercing weapon; it therefore coexisted with the arquebus over the period c. 1550 – c. 1650. For example, from 1636 the complement of the Spanish infantry company, in Flanders, was 200 men, 11 officers, 30 musketeers, 60 arqubusiers, 65 pikemen with body armour, 34 pikemen without armour. The musketeers received double pay.[17]With this in mind, it's rather easy to see why people would prefer to lag behind than blow money on the latest tech.
And even then I'm closer and probably have more reasonable prices, buy my guns friends B)
Poll